The Earth Charter – Companion to Agenda 21

Earth Charter Preamble

… we are one human family and one Earth community with a common destiny. We must join together to bring forth a sustainable global society founded on respect for nature…. Towards this end, it is imperative that we, the peoples of Earth, declare our responsibility to one another, to the greater community of life, and to future generations.

According to the Charter, humanity must undergo a global “change of mind and heart.” And the UN’s all-wise seers visualize themselves as the lead change agents for this global undertaking. The Earth Charter Initiative, however, candidly admits that it intends to recruit your children as change agents, as well. “We seek to increase the participation of young people in utilizing the Earth Charter as a guideline in their work as active agents of change,” says the Earth Charter Initiative website. They have been doing precisely that, and will be accelerating their program throughout the world — including in schools in your neighborhood. The U.S. Conference of Mayors is but one of hundreds of organizations, schools, municipalities, and other entities that have signed on as supporters of this declaration of a new “global ethic” for the world.
Introduction

In writing articles it becomes necessary to waffle between fact and conjecture.  The problem with interpreting political data is that it always requires inferential analysis. The reasons for this are many-fold, but the most obvious are simply because legislation is drafted in legal language and thus requires such interpretations; and secondly; those interpretations then have to be weighed against a body of empirical evidence that illuminates a political agenda or overall philosophy that has been exhibited over an extended period of time.  Nothing is ever as simple as it appears, nor does anything ever happen without a reason.  It is an arduous task to fit all the pieces together and reveal the big picture, but one thing you should be certain of is that there is a framework of thought that precedes all policy. To garner the full implication of this article it must be considered in conjunction with the Club of Rome and Agenda 21.  That information can be obtained by clicking on their respective links as they appear in this article.

It is vitally important to first read my article Artificial Paradise, Inc. to fully grasp the significance of this companion, or follow-up article. The foundational premise for global governance, global citizenship, and global ecological stewardship are predicated upon the foundational ‘fact’ that population explosion, industrialization, and accompanying consumerism are destroying our biosphere and depleting our resources.  These ‘facts’ are presented by the Club of Rome via their sophisticated computer modeling techniques.  Like the current climate-gate scandal involving the IPCC and their computer modeling, the Club of Rome has been vigorously contested by 1,000’s of reputable scientists and economist that you have not heard from.  This article is not delving into those aspects and I leave the reader to do their own research in this regards, but in a nutshell the main protestation is that the Club of Room extrapolates their data in a linear fashion without accounting for unknown variables in the advances of science, manufacturing, health care, etc.  For example, the Club of Room may state that current trends in population will equate to a world population of 12 billion by the year 2025, thus, the stresses upon the environment will increase by 100%, and this is unsustainable.  Statement A does not necessarily lead to the conclusion that this outcome B is certain, or even likely for that matter.  This can be likened to someone saying in 1970 that a 15 foot long 10 megabyte computer while have to be 30 foot long in order to double its computing power and so therefore this technology is unsustainable.

History

Club of Rome board members Mikhail Gorbachev and Maurice Strong authored the Earth Charter as a project undertaken by their respective organizations, Green Cross International and the Earth Council Alliance.  The idea for the Earth Charter was conceived in 1987 by another Club of Rome Board member, Gro Harlem Brundtland.  As an interesting side note, Gro Harlem Brundtland served as Prime Minister of Norway for 3 terms.  I cannot help but wonder if it is possible that she had any influence in helping fellow Club of Rome board member Al Gore obtain his Nobel Peace Prize?

Gro Harlem Brundtland was invited by then United Nations Secretary-General Javier Pérez de Cuéllar (and current Club of Rome board member) to establish and chair the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED), widely referred to as the Brundtland Commission. This commission published its report in 1987 entitled  Our Common Future and was the precursor to the Rio Earth Summit which gave rise to Agenda 21.  If you notice, both documents parallel one another in their language.  (excerpts below are from Our Common Future)

“Sustainable global development requires that those who are more affluent adopt lifestyles within the planet’s ecological means.”

“Sustainable development can only be pursued if population size and growth are in harmony with the changing productive potential of the ecosystem.”

Unlike Agenda 21, which is a document that provides a framework for hard laws, the Earth Charter is a set of principles that underscore and facilitate the strengthening and implementation of those laws . The Charter “was drafted in coordination with a hard law treaty that is designed to provide an integrated legal framework for all environment development law and policy.” This hard law treaty is called the International Covenant on Environment and Development and is being prepared by the Commission on Environmental Law at the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN), a behemoth agency which oversees 700+ governmental agencies worldwide. Interestingly, Maurice Strong is on the IUCN’s Board of Directors.

Development

The Earth Charter Commission approved the final text of the Earth Charter in 2000, and it has since been embraced by the UNESCO, many religious leaders around the world, the majority of world governments and countless Non-Governmental Organizations (NGO’s) and activist groups. Following the release of the Charter a series of international forums, called The Earth Dialogues were held at the United Nations to discuss how the general public could be convinced to adopt the “covenant with the Earth” in a real and personal way.

To consider the Earth Charter in its proper perspective, consider these two statements made by Julian Huxley in his founding documents in the formation of UNESCO:

“Further, since the world to-day is in process of becoming one, and since a major aim of UNESCO must be to help in the speedy and satisfactory realisation of this process, that UNESCO must pay special attention to international education – to use education as a function of a world society, in addition to its functions in relation to national societies, to regional or religious or intellectual groups, or to local communities.” – page 29

“There are thus two tasks for the Mass Media division of UNESCO, the one general, the other special. The special one is to enlist the press and the radio and the cinema to the fullest extent in the service of formal and adult education, of science and learning, of art and culture. The general one is to see that these agencies are used both to contribute to mutual comprehension between different nations and cultures, and also to promote the growth of a common outlook shared by all nations and cultures.” –  page 60

The entire document can be found by [clicking here]

Perhaps most revealing was the forum for Inter-Religious Groups and Spiritual Leaders. As stated in the forums official meeting minutes, the intent was to deal with “the ethics of intolerant righteousness and the greed of short term gain, as these cannot lead us to sustainable development. It is clear that our religious institutions have barely begun to articulate the core values of sustainable development. In their fundamentalist – fanatical forms, religions throughout history have justified terrorism, jihads and crusades against people who hold different beliefs and against the Earth itself.” So we can clearly see who they consider their enemy to be.

While supporters of the Earth Charter consider traditional mono-theistic religions to be the main obstacle to peaceful coexistence and sustainable life on Earth, they do not propose doing away with spirituality. The Earth Charter goes into detail about the need for faith and spirituality in human life. The preamble of the charter states “the spirit of human solidarity and kinship with all life is strengthened when we live with reverence for the mystery of being, gratitude for the gift of life, and humility regarding the human place in nature.”

So what exactly does this Earth Charter contain?  It clearly lays out the Constitution for a New Green Society. “The choice is ours,” it states, “form a global partnership to care for Earth and one another or risk the destruction of ourselves and the diversity of life. Fundamental changes are needed in our values, institutions, and ways of living.”

The Earth Charter concludes:

As never before in history, common destiny beckons us to seek a new beginning. Such renewal is the promise of these Earth Charter principles. To fulfill this promise, we must commit ourselves to adopt and promote the values and objectives of the Charter. This requires a change of mind and heart. It requires a new sense of global interdependence and universal responsibility. We must imaginatively develop and apply the vision of a sustainable way of life locally, nationally, regionally, and globally. Our cultural diversity is a precious heritage and different cultures will find their own distinctive ways to realize the vision. We must deepen and expand the global dialogue that generated the Earth Charter, for we have much to learn from the ongoing collaborative search for truth and wisdom.”

“Life often involves tensions between important values. This can mean difficult choices. However, we must find ways to harmonize diversity with unity, the exercise of freedom with the common good, short-term objectives with long-term goals. Every individual, family, organization, and community has a vital role to play. The arts, sciences, religions, educational institutions, media, businesses, nongovernmental organizations, and governments are all called to offer creative leadership. The partnership of government, civil society, and business is essential for effective governance.”

“In order to build a sustainable global community, the nations of the world must renew their commitment to the United Nations, fulfill their obligations under existing international agreements, and support the implementation of Earth Charter principles with an international legally binding instrument on environment and development. Let ours be a time remembered for the awakening of a new reverence for life, the firm resolve to achieve sustainability, the quickening of the struggle for justice and peace, and the joyful celebration of life.”

Unlike Agenda 21, the Earth Charter is not being forced on local communities from above. The United Nations is quietly fostering a grass-roots mainstream movement where people personally commit themselves to the Charter. They believe that this personal commitment will be necessary to bring about the societal transformation that the Charter requires. The primary tool being used to permeate society with awareness and acceptance of the Charter is the Earth Charter Initiative. This is another brain-child of Strong and Gorbachev.

According to their own description “The Earth Charter Initiative is the collective name for an extraordinarily diverse, global network of people, organizations, and institutions who participate in promoting the Earth Charter, and in implementing its principles in practice. The Initiative is a broad-based, voluntary, civil society effort, but participants include leading international institutions, national governments, university associations, NGOs, cities, faith groups, and many well-known leaders in sustainable development.”

The Earth Charter Initiative is managed by the United Nations University of Peace. The governing council of this University contains some very interesting names. Many of its top academics are members of the Club of Rome. In fact the infamous Maurice Strong is the President of the University and its Rector, Martin Lees, is the Secretary General of the Club of Rome. The founder and current Chancellor of the University is Robert Muller, former Assistant-Secretary of the United Nations, and its #2 ranked official. Dr. Muller is very active in the educational and spiritual aspects of the Earth Charter and apparently he has a direct pipeline to God, thus giving his voice much more moral authority.  From his own website Good Morning World you can read the entire list of ideas he has conjured and bounces off God for approval. (scroll down to bottom, and on the way down notice that prior to his final stamp of approval from God, he has been dialoguing with “Earth”.  Robert Muller Schools are springing up all over the world

God:
“Dear Robert, congratulations for having finished your 4000 ideas. May I ask you: which one do you consider the most important?”

I:
Well, my most important idea and conclusion after all my adult life as a world civil servant is this:

THE UNITED NATIONS MUST BE VASTLY STRENGTHENED TO RESOLVE THE MAJOR GLOBAL PROBLEMS HENCEFORTH INCREASINGLY CONFRONTING HUMANITY AND THE EARTH. IT MUST BE EMPOWERED TO ADOPT AND ENFORCE WORLD LAWS AND REGULATIONS.

God:
“Thank you, dear Robert, for what you are recommending. Perhaps after all, the greatest jewel of my Creation, the Earth, can be saved.

You forgot to mention two important recent efforts which failed: a World Commission of Eminent Personalities on Global Governance met under the Chairmanship of Mr. Ingvar Carlsson, former Prime Minister of Sweden in 1994 and recommended “the General Assembly should agree to hold a World Conference on Governance in 1998, with its decisions to be ratified and put into effect by 2000. That will allow more than two years for the preparatory process.” No action whatsoever was taken by the UN General Assembly on these recommendations.

Secondly, the year 2000 General Assembly of heads of states level had the following task on its agenda: “to focus on means to solve our primary global problems and to reform the means of global governance in order to meet the challenges of the 21st century.”

Again the General Assembly did nothing.

Under these circumstances I cannot accept that you consider your 4000 ideas to be the end. You should, you must continue and work hard on implementation. I will help you from heaven, creating the right circumstances and ensuring that your ideas and efforts will be known at the right, highest world levels.”

I:
already written 232 more ideas which will lead hopefully someday to a total of 5000!

God:
“I sincerely hope so and I will bless you with a longer life to do it.”

the United Nations should urgently consider several world urgency plans or conferences to halt the rapid decline of Plane Earth’s life giving capacities and wealth:

Idea 5285 a world emergency plan to stop for at least five years the human population explosion;

Idea 5286 a world emergency plan for the more rapid reduction of carbon dioxide emissions;

Idea 5287 a world emergency plan to reduce humanity’s colossal unnecessary productions and Earth destroying wastes;

Idea 5288 a world emergency plan to avoid further risks of climatic changes;

Idea 5289 a basic review of the entire transportation ways, systems and habitats of human on planet Earth;

Idea 5292 an urgent and deep, serious, fundamental review of all other aspects of the 21 basic segments of human life on planet Earth listed earlier in this document but worth repeating:

a new political system for planet Earth
a new economics
a new education
a new media and communications
a new democracy
a new global leadership
a spiritual Renaissance and inter religious cooperation
a non violent human society
a well preserved planet
a descent well being for all humans
a stabilization of the world population
right human settlements on the planet
the disarmament, demilitarization, denuclearization and global security of the planet
a new science and technology
a new anthropology, sociology and new ways of life
a new human biology
a new philosophy, cosmology and long term, view of evolution
a new world ethics and justice
a new world psychology
a new science and art of planetary management
an art and culture Renaissance

Blasphemous Symbols

Weeks before the start of Earth Summit II, the Earth Charter arrived in Johannesburg for a series of rituals, celebrations, and promotions aimed at setting the spiritual tone for the global conference. The venerated Charter is housed and transported in the Ark of Hope, a blasphemous mimicry of the biblical Ark of the Covenant, which held the two tablets containing the Ten Commandments that God gave to Moses. The Ark of Hope is actually designed to look like the Ark of the Covenant and its devotees carry it around with worshipful solemnity. Accompanying the Charter and the Ark are the Temenos Books, containing aboriginal Earth Masks and “visual prayers/affirmations for global healing, peace, and gratitude,” created by 3,000 artists, teachers, students, and mystics. According to the Temenos Project, which launched the effort, a temenos is “a magical sacred circle where special rules apply and extraordinary events inevitably occur.”

The Ark, Charter, and Temenos Books were placed on display at the UN summit site and then put to work building the new global ethic. Day after day, UN acolytes carried the sacred objects from school to school, where tens of thousands of children already had been prepped with Earth Charter propaganda. Public ceremonies with mayors and celebrities augmented the school events.

The summit’s opening day featured a four-hour symposium entitled, “Educating for Sustainable Living with the Earth Charter.” Steven Rockefeller, a religion professor and scion of the fabulously wealthy banking family that donated the land for the UN headquarters in New York, was preeminent among the presenters. Professor Rockefeller is also chairman of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund and the Earth Charter International Drafting Committee. According to Rockefeller, the way to go about “building peace on earth” is through the “inclusive, integrated and spiritual approach” of the Earth Charter.

Earth Charter Integration

Outlining how the Earth Charter is to be integrated into lifelong education for all, Hans van Ginkel, chairman of the International Association of Universities, told the symposium: “We must mobilize all in education about sustainability; that’s how we meet the next generation.” Sixteen million teachers must be trained, he noted, and “the only way to move forward is by integrating the Earth Charter into curriculum.”

The Stong-Gorbachev Earth Charter effort is already fast at work on that score. Their website declares:

“The Earth Charter values and principles must be taught, contemplated, applied and internalized. To this end, the Earth Charter needs to be incorporated into both formal and non-formal education. This process must involve various communities, continue to integrate the Charter into the curriculum of schools and universities, and constitute an ongoing process of life-long learning.”

According to the same website, the Earth Council, UNESCO, and the Earth Charter Initiative folks already have many of the curriculum materials and programs prepared; in fact, they’re already up and running in schools across the globe.
The Charter’s authors are not shy about the importance of their handiwork. “My hope is that this charter will be a kind of Ten Commandments, a ‘Sermon on the Mount,’ that provides a guide for human behavior toward the environment in the next century and beyond,” Gorbachev stated in a 1997 interview with the Los Angeles Times. Canadian billionaire socialist Maurice Strong, who presided over the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, is somewhat less tentative. “The real goal of the Earth Charter,” said Strong, “is that it will in fact become like the Ten Commandments.” Mr. Strong had high hopes that the Charter, conceived in 1987, would be adopted by the world at Rio. It was decided that the world was not ready for the release of a charter to invigorate the world into embracing a paradigm of sustainable consciousness.  My interpretation of this hesitation is simply due to the fact that the notion of man-made global climate change had not been indoctrinated thoroughly enough to start cramming something as radical as the Earth Charter down everyone’s throats without threat of massive resistance.

In his opening address to the Rio summit, Strong directed the world’s attention to the “Declaration of the Sacred Earth,” which was part of the pre-Summit ceremonies. “The changes in behavior and direction called for here,” said Strong, “must be rooted in our deepest spiritual, moral, and ethical values.” This dovetails precisely for what is called for in Agenda 21, chapter 36:  Promoting education, public awareness and training.  According to the declaration, “The [ecological] crisis transcends all national, religious, cultural, social, political and economic boundaries.” “The responsibility of each human being today is to choose between the force of darkness and the force of light,” Strong exhorted. “We must therefore transform our attitudes and values, and adopt a renewed respect for the superior laws of Divine Nature.”

The “Sacred” Text

“The protection of Earth’s vitality, diversity, and beauty is a sacred trust,” the Earth Charter asserts. However, “an unprecedented rise in human population has overburdened ecological and social systems. The foundations of global security are threatened.” Thus, “we urgently need a shared vision of basic values to provide an ethical foundation for the emerging world community.”

The Charter is making its way to schools, city governments, state legislatures, teachers organizations, civic groups, professional associations, judges, and law schools via a myriad of programs initiated by the United Nations.  One such program was the Global Judges Symposium which concluded its summit activities by issuing the so-called Johannesburg Principles on the Rule of Law and Sustainable Development. “We recognize,” it states, “the importance of ensuring that environmental law and law in the field of sustainable development feature prominently in academic curricula, legal studies and training at all levels, in particular among judges and others engaged in the judicial process.”

This judicial symposium was sponsored by the United Nations Environmental Program (largely supported by U.S. tax dollars) and the Environmental Law Institute, one of the principal eco-activist legal groups supported by U.S. tax-exempt foundations.

The plan is to orchestrate a global stealth campaign for the Charter among a sympathetic core constituency. As the Earth Charter campaign picks up steam, activists will obtain signatures and public support for this new global ethic from local, state, and national governments, schools, and organizations – without stirring the suspicions and opposition of churches, pro-life, and pro-family forces. Once a critical mass of support has been built among students, teachers, journalists, and public officials, the Charter will appear to be universally accepted and unstoppable.

To further this goal, the United Nations calls upon its 58,000 NGOs to push for the United Nations Parliament Assembly (UNPA) and since they always claim that their actions are on the behest of the people, in this instance you can voice your own support by [clicking here].  Nonetheless, in typical political fashion, it is not a true democratic process. It is to be a legislative government conceived and run by NGOs who are just as bought as the politicians themselves. NGO members are not elected by the people. They can be managed by all those who have money to let them pursue their fads.

Transformation of the Soul

As many of you are aware there is an ongoing onslaught against traditional Judeo-Christian religions and values, while simultaneously seemingly embracing Islamic values.  In fact, all of our usual ‘players’ (Al Gore, Maurice Strong, Mikhail Gorbachev, et al) claim to be devout disciples of the Baha’i Faith.

Baha’i literature proclaims the following:

“National rivalries, hatreds, and intrigues will cease, and racial animosity and prejudice will be replaced by racial amity, understanding and cooperation.  The causes of religious strife will be permanently removed, economic barriers and restrictions will be completely abolished, and the inordinate distinction between classes will be obliterated.  Destitution on the one hand, and gross accumulation of ownership on the other, will disappear.”

Baha’i grew out of Islam, and is in fact a stepchild of the Islamic faith, albeit a despised one.  Rather than naming Muhammad as the greatest of the prophets as the Muslims do, Baha’is hold Baha’u’llah to be the greatest of the prophets while extolling the virtues of Gaia, Mother Earth.

The Baha’i faith has become a popular religion in an environment of ecumenism, inclusiveness and political correctness.  Embraced eagerly by the United Nations and other interfaith organizations, Baha’i is a growing humanist influence on our world.  There are currently 17,148 Local Spiritual Assemblies of the Baha’i faith in the world and 4,515 in the United States alone.  Members claim a presence in 235 countries and their literature is translated into 700 languages with a total world membership estimated at 5,000,000.  The Baha’i Faith maintains chapels and meditation rooms within the United Nations.

Notice how their mission statement dovetails with Agenda 21?  Let’s expound on this a bit, using our good buddy Maurice Strong as an example.

Our global busy-body Maurice Strong was the founder and Secretary General of the United Nations Environment Programme and Senior Advisor to Kofi Annan. He also founded the Earth Council and the Earth Charter Initiative, and was former President of the United Nations University of Peace. He, more than anyone else, has been the architect of the global green agenda. Strong is a devout Baha’i and from his lofty positions within the UN has permeated the organization with Gaian theology.

He is the author of most of the key UN environmental policies and plans including Agenda 21, the Earth Charter, the Kyoto Protocol and the UN report on Global Governance. While he chaired the Rio Earth Summit, outside his wife Hanne and 300 followers called the Wisdom-Keepers, continuously beat drums, chanted prayers to Gaia, and tended scared flames in order to “establish and hold the energy field” for the duration of the summit. You can view actual footage of these ceremonies on YouTube. He founded the Manitou Institute where various Hindu, Buddhist, and New Age groups perform rituals to heal Gaia. The Institutes Mission is “to perpetuate the ancient tradition of peoples of many tribes journeying here for a sacred connection to the Earth.

The Aquarian Age Community

Robert Muller is another predominant player in ‘global green’ and strongly advocates the philosophies of Alice Bailey, which are in turn echoed by the Aquarian Age Community. The AAC was founded by the Lucis Trust (subsidiary of Lucifer Publishing Company, founded by Alice Bailey) and describes its mission as “preparing the way for the imminent appearance of the World Spiritual Teacher.” They are an official consultative NGO in association with the United Nations’ Department of Public Information and their website is sponsored by the UN. On their website they state:

We have an informal network at the UN, a humanity underground. It consists of those who are committed, aware, and striving to bring the New World to birth. It consists of people in high places and in low. The patient Secretary who has been 30 years with the UN, but lives with the vision and the spirit; of the professionals, and undersecretaries and heads of departments who are acting out the imperatives that their own inner vision gives them.

Some few are conscious of the sources of their inspiration; most are not. They are the Karma Yogis of our time – those whose path of spirituality is to achieve through doing – to grow through serving. They are found not only in the secretariat but also in the delegations to the UN, among the diplomats and their staffs, and also among folks like us, representatives of non-governmental organizations around the UN.” – link

Articles on their site include:

THE SPIRITUAL IMPULSE BEHIND THE UNITED NATIONS
PLANETARY INITIATION AND THE WORK OF THE UNITED NATIONS
THE NEW WORLD ORDER AND THE WORK OF THE UNITED NATIONS
SPIRITUALITY AT THE UNITED NATIONS
PREPARATION FOR THE REAPPEARANCE OF THE WORLD SPIRITUAL TEACHER

Conclusion

Obviously to fully understand the implications of the Earth Charter one must wander down some dark labyrinthine corridors that could generate entire books unto themselves.  All I could do within this article is give sketchy overviews that hopefully enable the reader to discern for themselves how all the pieces are fitting together. In my previous article, Artificial Paradise, Inc. I listed some of the organizations that are committed to promulgating the spiritual/educational aspects of Agenda 21 via the Earth Charter. We will never know if these people actually believe this stuff, or merely recognized how convenient it would be to have everyone else embrace this paganism.  Afertall, what sacrifices wouldyou make to save your Goddess, Mother Earth?  Whatever that case may be, it is obvious that Earth worshippers would gleefully embrace policies that serve to protect her. When the Earth Charter is considered in conjunction with Agenda 21 then the achievement of a total transformation of the world can be more fully comprehended.  Global citizenship, ecological stewardship, social equity, and all these new-age terms take on meaning with much greater significance.

It is hard to point to the Earth Charter alone and ascribe to it just how insidious it is, for it must be weighed against all the beliefs of the individuals and organizations that are promoting it.  I hope I succeeded in bringing more clarity to this endeavor.

There is nothing wrong with spiritual enlightenment as they portray it, however, they are merely the repeater of words and seek to have others “think” accordingly.  This is NOT enlightenment. Just as one could be quite adept at quoting the Bible and the words of Christ, this does not necessarily make them in any way Christ-like. What should be glaringly obvious to anyone is that enlightenment is a process that requires a complete regression of developmental structuring of the ego.  It is a lifetime journey that defies a ‘thought-process’.  Perhaps it would be nice to have the spiritual connections of the Nav’i as portrayed in the movie Avatar, but this is an evolutionary process and cannot be the outcome of mandates, rules, regulations, or laws.  As moving as the concepts may be intellectually, mankind is a long ways off from this experience of ‘satori‘.  In fact, although we have evolved greatly in our scientific/industrial capacities, mankind on the whole hasn’t changed much since the beginning of recorded history.  For example, the current divorce rate in the United States is approximately 45% and another estimated 25% that wish they could get divorced but because of a variety of reasons they stick it out.  We can’t even get along with the ‘loves of our lives’ for an extended period of time, yet they purport how the world is ready to come together in a blissful union of peaceful co-existence. Perhaps I am under-developed, because I have not transcended my general distaste for my fellow American Liberals as yet, so it is unlikely I am ready to accept someone’s world view on socialism or capitalism when their country hasn’t even discovered the marvels of a toilet as yet.   It is recognition of the fact that contrived psychologies may be intellectually stirring for some period of time, but they can never be transformative, and that gives me hope that eventually this whole house of cards will collapse.  We are in for some tough times, but in the long run ‘individuality’ will prevail.

In doing my research for this article I came across the following which is chillingly germane to what is happening around us.  The original source is unknown.

  1. A slave’s education is coercive
  2. The slave is not told why he is being forced to be educated
  3. A slave’s education keeps the slave dependent on the thoughts of others
  4. A slave’s education keeps the slave weak
  5. A Slave’s education prepares him to work for others instead of preparing him to work for himself
  6. A slave’s education neglects the slave’s unique strengths and contributions, developing only what some other institution or group needs him for
  7. A slave’s education is not oriented toward the honor of the slave but the glory of his master
  8. A slave’s education is not under natural authority but is under the arbitrary authority of the self-appointed and self-validating
  9. A slave’s education does not develop the higher virtues of wisdom and justice (for rather obvious reasons)
  10. A slave’s education does not cultivate the qualities of a free person (virtue and honor and all that arises from them)

Introduction

I have some good news for you.  You have a life plan!  Your idyllic paradise has been carefully conceived and is awaiting just a couple more laws and regulations to be hammered out before given to you.  The bad news is that your life plan is not of your conception, nor perhaps even to your liking.  It is artificial, imposed by the CEO’s of AP, Inc.

Although many years of planning have gone into constructing this paradise that awaits you, you were never invited to participate in the planning because no one ever told you about it.  Chances are you may not have ever heard of Agenda 21, this blueprint of your paradise, so you might be shocked to learn that the 18th meeting of Agenda 21 just took place in NYC between May 3rd-14th of 2010 to discuss the next phase of constructing your Utopia.  In attendance were the 179 signatory nations as well as representatives from 2,146 NGOs (non-government organizations) that have been diligently working to facilitate the realization of your paradise over these past 18 years. This is all for you, but you weren’t even invited!  Maybe the heads of AP, Inc. just want to see the look of surprise on your face when they present you with your future.  I hate to be a spoil-sport and ruin this surprise, but I just can’t keep a secret very well I suppose.  According to the International Institute for Sustainable Development (one of 58,000 subsidiaries of AP, Inc.):

“Agenda 21 is a guide for business and government policies and for personal choices into the next century. It was endorsed by the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, the largest-ever meeting of world leaders. They were joined by hundreds of officials from United Nations organizations, municipal governments, business, scientific, non-government and other groups. Nearby, the `92 Global Forum held a series of meetings, lectures, seminars and exhibits on environment and development issues for the public. This drew 18,000 participants from 166 countries, as well as 400,000 visitors. There were 8,000 journalists covering the Rio meetings, and the results were seen, heard and read about around the world”.

These people sure know how to throw a party, don’t they?  This shindig makes AIG spa-oriented conferences look like child’s play!  All of this effort on your behalf, isn’t that nice?  I am particularly touched by the fact that over 8,000 journalists were present; they all must have been from the New York Times, MSNBC, and Times Magazine; because I never heard a word about Agenda 21 until just a few years ago.

My favorite part of the IISD’s description is the notion of  ‘personal choices’.  I have read Agenda 21 from cover to cover (several times) and I assure you, I never once saw anything that came remotely close to language like:  “would you prefer choice A, B, or C?”

As long as this article will inevitably be, it is merely the tip of the iceberg.  Agenda 21 encompasses every aspect of your life, and each topic has produced many books on its own.  Energy, biodiversity, climate change, governance, eco-responsible business, consumption, fossil fuels, water, food, poverty, etc etc.  Agenda 21 is an entire blueprint for re-structuring society on a global scale, and as such, is a daunting task to try to convey its importance and magnitude in some blog-friendly format.

What is Agenda 21?

Agenda 21 is the framework for a completely new paradigm in the 21st Century.  It is the outcome of the aforementioned United Nation’s Earth Summit.  Agenda 21 outlines in detail the UN’s vision for a centrally managed global society. You don’t have to worry about your future because Agenda 21 has a plan for how you will live, where you will live, how you commute, what you will eat, what you will learn (or be taught), and even who your God will be.  The good folks at AP, Inc. have taken care of everything you!  When fully implemented, Agenda 21 would have the government involved in every aspect of life for every human on earth. You’re gonna love it!  I italicized the word ‘implemented’ because Agenda 21 used to be called ‘The Programme for Implementation’.  That doesn’t sound like a pleasant surprise, so recently they changed the tagline to ‘A Programme of Action’.  That sounds nicer, doesn’t it? They forgot to change the name of their meetings though, for if you noticed (if you clicked the link on the meeting), they called this the ‘4th Implementation Cycle’.  Makes me wonder what they already implemented in cycles 1-3.  A cursory glance at the 4 major sections of Agenda 21 could give you an indication:

“To save Mother Earth, Agenda 21 argues that the UN must oversee strict regulation of our planet’s atmosphere, lakes, streams, rivers, coastal waters, wetlands, oceans, forests, jungles, grasslands, deserts, tundra, mountains, urban areas, rural areas, health care, education, nutrition, agriculture, labor, production, consumption – in short, everything. The most accessible version of the document to come out following the Rio summit was published under the title Agenda 21: The Earth Summit Strategy to Save Our Planet (Earthpress, 1993). Edited by environmental-activist attorney Daniel Sitarz and enthusiastically endorsed by Earth Summit chief Maurice Strong, the book provides a powerful, if unintended, indictment of the UN treaty. It approvingly admits:

Agenda 21 proposes an array of actions which are intended to be implemented by every person on Earth…. It calls for specific changes in the activities of all people….

“Effective execution of Agenda 21 will require a profound reorientation of all human society, unlike anything the world has ever experienced – a major shift in the priorities of both governments and individuals and an unprecedented redeployment of human and financial resources. This shift will demand that a concern for the environmental consequences of every human action be integrated into individual and collective decision-making at every level”.

The admission is staggering. Look again: “all human society,” “every person on Earth,” “every human action,” “every level,” “demand,” “require.” The totalitarian power grab is so stunningly transparent that it seems impossible that any nation would endorse it. Yet it was unanimously endorsed by all of the countries in attendance, including the United States”. [ link ]

In a nutshell, Agenda 21 is the framework that addresses the issue of sustainable development.  By now most everyone has heard this term as it has become part of our global societal lexicon.  Few people realize that whenever you hear those words you are hearing the jargon that was spawned within the womb of Agenda 21.  Sustainable development is understood to be mostly concerned with issues regarding land usage.  Although that is a correct theoretical interpretation, it is a vastly truncated understanding. Sustainability, as defined by Agenda 21 and politicians, is the screen through which every human action is viewed and judged, and those actions are deemed to be either positive or negative when weighed against this yardstick of judgment. Actions that are deemed non-sustainable are to be curtailed via a plethora of legislative restrictions accompanied by a myriad of punitive damages in many cases.  Sustainability can best be understood by contemplating those things that are deemed non-sustainable:

Source:  The Global Biodiversity Assessment Report by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)  *Bold text indicates items that are being addressed in current or pending legislation.

In the Beginning

As I am sure you are aware I have been using Artificial Paradise, Inc. in a satirical manner, but there is a real life corollary, an organization called  The Club of Rome.  The CEO’s of AP, Inc. are really the Board Members of the Club of Rome.  Members from this organization have been the principle players in developing what was to become Agenda 21, and they remain quite active in their role to implement it.  When I referred to the subsidiaries of AP, Inc. I was making reference to the 58,000 organizations registered with the United Nations that are committed to promulgating Agenda 21.  Inasmuch that Agenda 21 is a comprehensive re-structuring of society, each of these organizations dedicate themselves to certain aspects of Agenda 21.  These ‘non-government organizations’ (hereafter referred to as NGOs) can be think-tanks, policy recommendation consultants, advocacy groups, educational/spiritual organizations, or agencies that work on behalf of central governments to help implement policies on a local level.

The Club of Rome is a group of 300 individuals, comprised of 100 permanent Board Members and 200 Executive Members that may change from time to time.  All of the members are current or former heads of state, media moguls, financiers, world banking leaders, and high ranking United Nations officials. Some recognizable names are George Soros, David Rockefeller, Ted Turner, Bill Clinton, Henry Kissinger, Jimmy Carter, Bill Gates, and many more. Other prominent members that overtly contributed to the creation and implementation of Agenda 21 are:

Al Gore – lead man for promoting man-made climate change that gave rise to Agenda 21
Maurice Strong – former Chairman of the UNEP, co-author of the Earth Initiative
Mikhail Gorbachev – founder of Green Cross International, co-author of the Earth Initiative
Gro Harlem Brundtland – former Prime Minister of Norway,  Chair of the WCED (precursor to Agenda 21)
Robert Muller – former Assistant Secretary General of the UN, founder of the UN University of Peace
Kofi Annan – former Secretary General of the United Nations

(for a much more in-depth look at the Club of Romeclick here)

If we wander back through our memory you may recall that prior to the threat of extinction by eco-strangulation, the world faced extinction due to over-population.  All the members of the Club of Rome were huge supporters of eugenics, indeed, the Rockefeller Foundation had population control as its founding principle.  Focus groups came to the conclusion that a political campaign platform based on killing off most of the world’s population would probably not be very popular, so another vehicle was required.  In one of their many publications, ‘The First Global Revolution’, the Club of Rome had this to say:

The common enemy of humanity is man. In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself.”

The perfect vehicle was born!  Humans can all equally live with existential guilt. Climate itself has no national borders, so ‘death by climate’ is perfectly suited to impose restrictions on all humanity via a global governance program. Twenty years of getting man-made climate change ingrained into the worlds mind as some globally accepted truth, led other CoR members to speak out and strengthen the message, giving rise to the Framework for Paradise-Agenda 21.

We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis…” – David Rockefeller

We need a new paradigm of development in which the environment will be a priority. World civilization as we know it will soon end. We have very little time and we must act. If we can address the environmental problem, it will have to be done within a new system, a new paradigm. We have to change our mindset, the way humankind views the world.– Mikhail Gorbachev

We require a central organizing principle – one agreed to voluntarily. Minor shifts in policy, moderate improvement in laws and regulations, rhetoric offered in lieu of genuine change – these are all forms of appeasement, designed to satisfy the public’s desire to believe that sacrifice, struggle and a wrenching transformation of society will not be necessary.” – Al Gore

Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that aboutCurrent lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class – involving high meat intake, use of fossil fuels, appliances, air-conditioning, and suburban housing – are not sustainable.“- Maurice Strong

Agenda 21 incorporates within it all preceding language from various UN land, environment, biodiversity, social, and economic reform programs.  Last year at Copenhagen it was hoped that all nations would legally bind themselves to Agenda 21 by signing the UNFCCC.  I know many people were greatly concerned that Obama would sign this treaty, but I knew he would not because he had absolutely no need to do something so overtly when Agenda 21 is, and has been, in full operation in the United States ever since G.H. Bush signed it in 1992.  Although Agenda 21 is not a treaty and therefore is not legally binding, it hardly makes any difference if the policy is adopted and incorporated into every Federal Agency and is the driving force behind all policy and legislation.  In order to re-educate the world (and our children) the Earth Charter runs concurrent with Agenda 21 so as to indoctrinate the world consciousness to embrace ecological stewardship and global citizenship.  The Earth Charter was adopted by UNESCO and signed by G.W. Bush in 2000.  The Earth Charter also helps foster the notion of Mother Earth as the Supreme Deity.  There are literally 1,000’s of NGOs dedicated to this singular purpose.  The program for implementing the Earth Charter is called the Earth Charter Initiative .  Following are just a few of these ‘initiative’ NGOs that have been created by Club of Rome members.

Awakening Mind
Alliance for a New Humanity
Association for Global New Thought
The Ethical Globalization Initiative
Foundation for Conscious Evolution
Great Transition Initiative
The Earth Council Alliance
The World Future Council
The Alliance of Civilizations
The Global Marshall Plan

Once again, the primary players in foisting the spiritual dimensions of ‘sustainability’ upon the world are Maurice Strong, Mikhail Gorbachev, Al Gore, and Robert Muller.  Robert Muller is a hard man to ignore simply because on his own websites he has posted his direct conversations with God. [scroll about 1/3 down the page]. You have to admit, if God is telling ya what to do, it probably is a good idea to do it!  I sure am glad we have Robert Muller and this direct pipeline to the Divine Message! Reading Robert Muller can make your head swim, but he is very active in the spiritual consciousness of the new millennium.  Below are some of the websites that he maintains:

www.goodmorning-world.blogspot.com
www.robertmulller.org
www.goodmorningworld.org
www.centerforlivingethics.org
www.paradiseearth.us

To embed the policies outlined in Agenda 21 into our society, Clinton established The President’s Council on Sustainable Development in 1993.  The PCSD then hired the APA to develop guidelines of legislative actions.  They published this handbook in a tome entitled  ‘Growing Smart’. Today, smart growth is a common term in our society.  In fact, if you put the words smart growth into your browser, it will return about 8,000,000 hits.  Similarly, if you enter the words ‘sustainable development’ into your browser it will return you 25,000,000 hits!  Agenda 21 is very embedded into our country!

To facilitate the propagation of Agenda 21 (and basically change the nature of law in this country) Clinton had amended the Federal Advisory Committee Act.  This law governed the way NGOs interacted with the White House and Congress to help write and implement policy.  These NGOs then serve as the interface between Government and Society.  Simply stated the rules regulating NGOs  basically equate to something like this:  “I will hire you to give me a report that will prove man has created climate change, and then you must help champion my idea if you are to retain your consultative status with Congress”.  The IPCC is such an NGO.  NGOs that have obtained consultative status with the United Nations are called Civil Society Organizations, or CSOs.  The United States government maintains a database of 1,000 accredited NGOs at any given moment.  Of all of these 1,000, each of them is a CSO.  There is not a single organization representing America or American citizens that have consultative status.  This explains why you have never heard from any of the myriad of scientists or scientific organizations that say ‘man-mad climate change’ is a hoax.  They have no voice, no federal grant money, and in many cases no further career if they become too vocal.

Not only are NGOs helping to embed Agenda 21 throughout our country, but each Executive Agency are actively writing restrictive regulations (without need of a Congressional vote) to help foster in our artificial paradise.  Below are paragraphs taken directly from the websites of the USDA and the EPA respectively:

USDA: “The U.S. Government has joined with foreign governments, international organizations, non-governmental organizations, academia, and the private sector to plan and implement voluntary partnerships that promote economic growth, social development and environmental stewardship. For example, at the World Summit on Sustainable Development held in Johannesburg, South Africa, in 2002, the United States established and/or joined more than 20 partnerships to advance sustainable development. In addition, USAID, operating under the new Global Development Alliance (GDA) business model, has initiated or significantly expanded more than 200 public-private alliances in 2002 and 2003″.

“The United Nations recently passed a resolution on partnerships, “Towards Global Partnerships” (A/RES/58/129), and additional information regarding international sustainable development partnership efforts may be found at the UN’s Commission on Sustainable Development“.

EPA: “The United States government is extensively engaged in international climate change activities in areas such as science, mitigation and environmental monitoring. EPA actively participates in multilateral and bilateral activities by establishing partnerships and providing leadership and technical expertise. Multilaterally, the United States is a strong supporter of activities under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)“.

Brief Analysis of Agenda 21 Today

Let us look at a few chapters from Agenda 21 and see how they are being applied today.  If you want to predict your future, all you have to do is just glance over the names of all 40 chapter titles and it would be as if you are in possession of a crystal ball.

Combating poverty:  One of the first things Obama did when he took office was get the stagnant Global Poverty Act passed.  This obligated the United States to pay the United Nations an additional $65 billion annually to help combat poverty. Although I am not aware of this country ever receiving foreign aid to help combat our poverty (or crises), we continue to pay through the nose to everyone else.  There are many aspects to this that a thorough analysis would uncover, but suffice it to say this is also an instrument being used to re-distribute wealth.  New taxes are about to be imposed on U.S. citizens by the U.N. that will go into effect in 2012.  Additionally, in each chapter there is mention of helping to combat poverty in developing nations.  The U.S. has been giving away our money for decades in this effort, and it typically ends up in the pockets of some UN leader or corrupt third-world tyrant.  Irrespective of the fact that military analysts continually say we cannot win the war in Afghanistan so long as the leadership is a corrupt regime, no one seems to be apply this same logic to the war on poverty.  I find that curious.

Changing consumption patterns:  This sounds rather innocuous until you consider the scope of what consumption means.  In other words; everything you eat, drink, buy, or use. An example of some regulations and legislations that will serve to greatly restrict our consumption patterns are Cap and Trade, the Smart Grid, The Food Modernization Act and many more EPA and USDA regulations about to be enacted.  Our behavior is to be modified via an endless stream of taxes and punitive damages.  I am not going to delve into dissecting legislation so I will use as an example of this Obama’s own words:  “your energy prices are by necessity going to go sky high”. It is the intent to make fuel, energy, water, food, etc. so expensive that people will curtail their consumption.

Children and youth in sustainable development:  “Youth comprise nearly 30 per cent of the world’s population. The involvement of today’s youth in environment and development decision-making [this means getting their vote] and in the implementation of programmes is critical to the long-term success of Agenda 21″. Anyone that watches the news is acutely aware of how our children are being indoctrinated to embrace new values and perspectives. Our leaders are undermining the family unit as they repeatedly tell our children that they know better than their parents. I have already provided links to some of these sites, as well as mentioned the Earth Charter, which is the massive educational re-programming of the youth.  Al Gore founded 2 such organizations himself:  The Climate Project and The Climate Alliance.  The latter organization is a brilliant psychological construct that uses peer group identification processes.

Strengthening the role of non-governmental organizations:  “Involve non-governmental organizations in national mechanisms or procedures established to carry out Agenda 21, making the best use of their particular capacities, especially in the fields of education, poverty alleviation and environmental protection and rehabilitation. Review government education systems to identify ways to include and expand the involvement of non-governmental organizations in the field of formal and informal education and of public awareness. Governments will need to promulgate or strengthen, subject to country-specific conditions, any legislative measures necessary to enable the establishment by non-governmental organizations of consultative groups, and to ensure the right of non-governmental organizations to protect the public interest through legal action”.  This seems pretty self-explanatory, and when considered against the light of how Clinton amended FACA and made massive changes to the processes of awarding grants, it illuminates with much more clarity how a non-elected quasi-government has gained so much control over our lives.

Strengthening the role of workers and their trade unions:  “The existing network of collaboration among trade unions and their extensive membership provide important channels through which the concepts and practices of sustainable development can be supported”.  [oh great, Green Thugs at my doorstep!] Obama promised the Unions he would pass the Employees Free Choice Act which will in essence unionize every company in this country with 3 or more employees without due process of a voting procedure.  Not only will this serve immediate political interests, but it is also helping to to take ‘community organizing’ to the next level; ‘global organizing’.

Promoting education, public awareness and training:  “Education, including formal education, public awareness and training should be recognized as a process by which human beings and societies can reach their fullest potential. Education is critical for promoting sustainable development and improving the capacity of the people to address environment and development issues. While basic education provides the underpinning for any environmental and development education, the latter needs to be incorporated as an essential part of learning”.

Integrating environment and development in decision-making:  “The responsibility for bringing about changes lies with Governments in partnership with the private sector and local authorities, and in collaboration with national, regional and international organizations, including in particular UNEP, UNDP and the World Bank”. A massive re-distribution of wealth is taking place right now, and right under our noses.  This chapter is dedicated to expounding on the processes of strengthening Public-Private Partnerships, or PPPs.  The way this works is that your tax dollars are given to companies to help underwrite the costs of developing some enterprise, and then the profits are split between the Government and the Corporation –  (you don’t get any share of the profits even though it was your money that was used).  Like NGOs, you have to be an entity that is on ‘the team’ in order to get this federal help.  In short, this is one giant circle of collusion.  In order to survive in the future, your company must be on The Green Team.  An excellent example of this is Whole Foods, Inc.  You may recall how Whole Foods CEO John Mackey spoke out vehemently against the Health Care Bill. Garnering the wrath of the Left and the scrutiny of the Federal Government was not serving his business objectives to well, so he decided to ‘play ball’.  Here is a link to his new “sustainable” website:  Catalyzing Conscious Capitalism.  Learning how to ‘play ball’ in the 21st century has produced a plethora of publications and toolkits that NGOs have been hired to produce, (paid for by taxpayers in the form of grants).  Here is one example:  Environment, Ethics, and Business.

Life in Paradise Tomorrow

As a foundation for my fanciful ruminations, there are some immutable facts that continually gnaw at me.  The Chicago Climate Exchange proclaimed on TV that they are anticipating annual sales of $10 trillion.  Al Gore’s company, Generations Investment Management, states on his website that they anticipate annual sales of $13 trillion.  Pondering the magnitude of these numbers is mind-boggling when you consider that the entire worlds annual GDP is $69 trillion!  In other words, these 2 companies alone (which are predominately owned by Club of Rome members) anticipate sales that equal 1/3 of the entire worlds wealth!  It also came as a surprise to me that revenues from Cap and Trade have already been accounted for in the 2012 budget.  This law has not even been passed as yet, but it seems that these people have considered it to be a foregone conclusion.  Indeed, the Chicago Climate Exchange was conceived 10 years ago as a way to capitalize upon emissions that Cap and Trade will regulate once passed.  Makes me wonder what ever happened to democracy.  Makes me question all this noble sounding rhetoric about offering people ‘choices’.

The objective of our Administration under the guidelines of Agenda 21 is to have everyone hooked up to the smart grid and living within defined boundaries designated for human habitat, comfortably ensconced within their little eco-hovel.  Smart Growth has been implemented in 1,408 cities in the US by a CSO called ICLEI (International Council for Local Environment Initiatives). They’re still going strong. The ultimate goal is to build sustainable cities with a small foot print so to save as much land as possible. If push comes to shove between YOUR life and that of the Delta Smelt…YOU LOSE!  Protection of the biosphere takes precedence over your needs or wants. If the impulse to do something foolish (like flushing a toilet when you could have saved water by urinating in the shower) hasn’t been brainwashed out of you by the new educational revolution, the bevy of regulations levied against you will soon have you ‘behaving properly’.
In order to engineer the population into these pre-designated zones of habitation, the US government is taking over our land at an alarming rate even though there is no constitutional basis for government ownership of land other than to establish military bases. Currently the government owns 650 million sq acres of our land with another 300 million acres about to be claimed via Wildlands Projects.  Additionally Obama has put into motion claiming land by using the Antiquities Act and establishing protected heritage sites. Ironically enough all the land the government is claiming just happens to be where all our agriculture is, our minerals, water, oil, and other valuable resources.

We are being led to believe that it is only the lacking of our spiritual enlightenment that prevents us from seeing the beauty of life confined so we can co-habitat in symbiotic bliss with bugs and furry little creatures while a higher communal harmony can be achieved by our shared love of our Goddess Mother Earth.  The Aquarian Age Community within the United Nations is at this moment debating who shall be our new spiritual leader.  You might find it of interest to read their article on their vision for a New World Order.

Welcome to paradise…

…have a nice day!

Part 1

Part 2

The Global Transformation

The information in this brochure is organized in such a way that it is factual (and immutable) and easy to glean with a cursory glance. But also, there is hours and hours of substantive depth and revelations if the basic skeleton is compelling enough to induce the reader to inquire further. Committed patriots should look at every link and read every article. “WE” are the one’s that are here because of our commitment to save our country…so it is incumbent upon us to be the experts so we can in turn lead others into opening their eyes! We cannot save this country by continuing to fail to recognize where the real problem lies and then being endlessly distracted by the comparative superfluous.

We need to be aware of what is driving ALL this policy so we can begin to cut the head off the snake. We need to make sure those candidates whom we think will change Washington in 2010 understand what is REALLY going on…otherwise what success could they possibly have?

This is why I did the handbook. Understanding Agenda 21; (and how the processes to circumvent treaty’s and still engage in international law are really working); identifies entirely the problem–for Health Care, Cap and Trade, Codex Alimentarius, etc etc…they are all part of Agenda 21. Now we need to make EVERYONE aware so each has the ‘big picture’. It is essential that our candidates are aware, otherwise there is nothing they can really do.

“You have heard it said that this is an age of moral crisis. You have said it yourself, half in fear, half in hope that the words had no meaning. You have cried that man’s sins are destroying the world and you have cursed human nature for its unwillingness to practice the virtues you demanded. Since virtue, to you, consists of sacrifice, you have demanded more sacrifices at every successive disaster. In the name of a return to morality, you have sacrificed all those evils which you held as the cause of your plight. You have sacrificed justice to mercy. You have sacrificed independence to unity. You have sacrificed reason to faith. You have sacrificed wealth to need. You have sacrificed self-esteem to self-denial. You have sacrificed happiness to duty.

“You have destroyed all that which you held to be evil and achieved all that which you held to be good. Why, then, do you shrink in horror from the sight of the world around you? That world is not the product of your sins, it is the product and the image of your virtues. It is your moral ideal brought into reality in its full and final perfection. You have fought for it, you have dreamed of it, and you have wished it, and I-I am the man who has granted you your wish.

“Your ideal had an implacable enemy, which your code of morality was designed to destroy. I have withdrawn that enemy. I have taken it out of your way and out of your reach. I have removed the source of all those evils you were sacrificing one by one. I have ended your battle. I have stopped your motor. I have deprived your world of man’s mind.

“Men do not live by the mind, you say? I have withdrawn those who do. The mind is impotent, you say? I have withdrawn those whose mind isn’t. There are values higher than the mind, you say? I have withdrawn those for whom there aren’t.

“While you were dragging to your sacrificial altars the men of justice, of independence, of reason, of wealth, of self-esteem-I beat you to it, I reached them first. I told them the nature of the game you were playing and the nature of that moral code of yours, which they had been too innocently generous to grasp. I showed them the way to live by another morality-mine. It is mine that they chose to follow.

“All the men who have vanished, the men you hated, yet dreaded to lose, it is I who have taken them away from you. Do not attempt to find us. We do not choose to be found. Do not cry that it is our duty to serve you. We do not recognize such duty. Do not cry that you need us. We do not consider need a claim. Do not cry that you own us. You don’t. Do not beg us to return. We are on strike, we, the men of the mind.

“We are on strike against self-immolation. We are on strike against the creed of unearned rewards and unrewarded duties. We are on strike against the dogma that the pursuit of one’s happiness is evil. We are on strike against the doctrine that life is guilt.

“There is a difference between our strike and all those you’ve practiced for centuries: our strike consists, not of making demands, but of granting them. We are evil, according to your morality. We have chosen not to harm you any longer. We are useless, according to your economics. We have chosen not to exploit you any longer. We are dangerous and to be shackled, according to your politics. We have chosen not to endanger you, nor to wear the shackles any longer. We are only an illusion, according to your philosophy. We have chosen not to blind you any longer and have left you free to face reality-the reality you wanted, the world as you see it now, a world without mind.

“We have granted you everything you demanded of us, we who had always been the givers, but have only now understood it. We have no demands to present to you, no terms to bargain about, no compromise to reach. You have nothing to offer us. We do not need you.

“Are you now crying: No, this was not what you wanted? A mindless world of ruins was not your goal? You did not want us to leave you? You moral cannibals, I know that you’ve always known what it was that you wanted. But your game is up, because now we know it, too.

“Through centuries of scourges and disasters, brought about by your code of morality, you have cried that your code had been broken, that the scourges were punishment for breaking it, that men were too weak and too selfish to spill all the blood it required. You damned man, you damned existence, you damned this earth, but never dared to question your code. Your victims took the blame and struggled on, with your curses as reward for their martyrdom-while you went on crying that your code was noble, but human nature was not good enough to practice it. And no one rose to ask the question: Good?-by what standard?

“You wanted to know John Galt’s identity. I am the man who has asked that question.

“Yes, this is an age of moral crisis. Yes, you are bearing punishment for your evil. But it is not man who is now on trial and it is not human nature that will take the blame. It is your moral code that’s through, this time. Your moral code has reached its climax, the blind alley at the end of its course. And if you wish to go on living, what you now need is not to return to morality-you who have never known any-but to discover it.

“You have heard no concepts of morality but the mystical or the social. You have been taught that morality is a code of behavior imposed on you by whim, the whim of a supernatural power or the whim of society, to serve God’s purpose or your neighbor’s welfare, to please an authority beyond the grave or else next door-but not to serve your life or pleasure. Your pleasure, you have been taught, is to be found in immorality, your interests would best be served by evil, and any moral code must be designed not for you, but against you, not to further your life, but to drain it.

“For centuries, the battle of morality was fought between those who claimed that your life belongs to God and those who claimed that it belongs to your neighbors-between those who preached that the good is self-sacrifice for the sake of ghosts in heaven and those who preached that the good is self-sacrifice for the sake of incompetents on earth. And no one came to say that your life belongs to you and that the good is to live it.

“Both sides agreed that morality demands the surrender of your self-interest and of your mind, that the moral and the practical are opposites, that morality is not the province of reason, but the province of faith and force. Both sides agreed that no rational morality is possible, that there is no right or wrong in reason-that in reason there’s no reason to be moral.

“Whatever else they fought about, it was against man’s mind that all your moralists have stood united. It was man’s mind that all their schemes and systems were intended to despoil and destroy. Now choose to perish or to learn that the anti-mind is the anti-life.

“Man’s mind is his basic tool of survival. Life is given to him, survival is not. His body is given to him, its sustenance is not. His mind is given to him, its content is not. To remain alive, he must act, and before he can act he must know the nature and purpose of his action. He cannot obtain his food without a knowledge of food and of the way to obtain it. He cannot dig a ditch-or build a cyclotron-without a knowledge of his aim and of the means to achieve it. To remain alive, he must think.

“But to think is an act of choice. The key to what you so recklessly call ‘human nature,’ the open secret you live with, yet dread to name, is the fact that man is a being of volitional consciousness. Reason does not work automatically; thinking is not a mechanical process; the connections of logic are not made by instinct. The function of your stomach, lungs or heart is automatic; the function of your mind is not. In any hour and issue of your life, you are free to think or to evade that effort. But you are not free to escape from your nature, from the fact that reason is your means of survival-so that for you, who are a human being, the question ‘to be or not to be’ is the question ‘to’ think or not to think.’

“A being of volitional consciousness has no automatic course of behavior. He needs a code of values to guide his actions. ‘Value’ is that which one acts to gain and keep, ‘virtue’ is the action by which one gains and keeps it. ‘Value’ presupposes an answer to the question: of value to whom and for what? ‘Value’ presupposes a standard, a purpose and the necessity of action in the face of an alternative. Where there are no alternatives, no values are possible.

“There is only one fundamental alternative in the universe: existence or non-existence-and it pertains to a single class of entities: to living organisms. The existence of inanimate matter is unconditional, the existence of life is not; it depends on a specific course of action. Matter is indestructible, it changes its forms, but it cannot cease to exist. It is only a living organism that faces a constant alternative: the issue of life or death. Life is a process of self-sustaining and-self-generated action. If an organism fails in that action, it does; its chemical elements remain, but its life goes out of existence. It is only the concept of ‘Life’ that makes the concept of ‘Value’ possible. It is only to a living entity that things can be good or evil.

“A plant must feed itself in order to live; the sunlight, the water, the chemicals it needs are the values its nature has set it to pursue; its life is the standard of value directing its actions. But a plant has no choice of action; there are alternatives in the conditions it encounters, but there is no alternative in its function: it acts automatically to further its life, it cannot act for its own destruction.

“An animal is equipped for sustaining its life; its senses provide it with an automatic code of action, an automatic knowledge of what is good for it or evil. It has no power to extend its knowledge or to evade it. In conditions where its knowledge proves inadequate, it dies. But so long as it lives, it acts on its knowledge, with automatic safety and no power of choice, it is unable to ignore its own good, unable to decide to choose the evil and act as its own destroyer.

“Man has no automatic code of survival. His particular distinction from all other living species is the necessity to act in the face of alternatives by means of volitional choice. He has no automatic knowledge of what is good for him or evil, what values his life depends on, what course of action it requires. Are you prattling about an instinct of self-preservation? An instinct of self-preservation is precisely what man does not possess. An ‘instinct’ is an unerring and automatic form of knowledge. A desire is not an instinct. A desire to live does not give you the knowledge required for living. And even man’s desire to live is not automatic: your secret evil today is that that is the desire you do not hold. Your fear of death is not a love of life and will not give you the knowledge needed to keep it. Man must obtain his knowledge and choose his actions by a process of thinking, which nature will not force him t9 perform. Man has the power to act as his own destroyer-and that is the way he has acted through most of his history.

“A living entity that regarded its means of survival as evil, would not survive. A plant that struggled to mangle its roots, a bird that fought to break its wings would not remain for long in the existence they affronted. But the history of man has been a struggle to deny and to destroy his mind.

“Man has been called a rational being, but rationality is a matter of choice-and the alternative his nature offers him is: rational being or suicidal animal. Man has to be man-by choice; he has to hold his life as a value-by choice: he has to learn to sustain it-by choice; he has to discover the values it requires and practice his virtues-by choice.

“A code of values accepted by choice is a code of morality.

“Whoever you are, you who are hearing me now, I am speaking to whatever living remnant is left uncorrupted within you, to the remnant of the human, to your mind, and I say: There is a morality of reason, a morality proper to man, and Man’s Life is its standard of value.

“All that which is proper to the life of a rational being is the good; all that which destroys it is the evil.

“Man’s life, as required by his nature, is not the life of a mindless brute, of a looting thug or a mooching mystic, but the life of a thinking being-not life by means of force or fraud, but life by means of achievement-not survival at any price, since there’s only one price that pays for man’s survival: reason.

“Man’s life is the standard of morality, but your own life is its purpose. If existence on earth is your goal, you must choose your actions and values by the standard of that which is proper to man-for the purpose of preserving, fulfilling and enjoying the irreplaceable value which is your life.

“Since life requires a specific course of action, any other course will destroy it. A being who does not hold his own life as the motive and goal of his actions, is acting on the motive and standard of death. Such a being is a metaphysical monstrosity, struggling to oppose, negate and contradict the fact of his own existence, running blindly amuck on a trail of destruction, capable of nothing but pain.

“Happiness is the successful state of life, pain is an agent of death. Happiness is that state of consciousness which proceeds from the achievement of one’s values. A morality that dares to tell you to find happiness in the renunciation of your happiness-to value the failure of your values-is an insolent negation of morality. A doctrine that gives you, as an ideal, the role of a sacrificial animal seeking slaughter on the altars of others, is giving you death as your standard. By the grace of reality and the nature of life, man-every man-is an end in himself, he exists for his own sake, and the achievement of his own happiness is his highest moral purpose.

“But neither life nor happiness can be achieved by the pursuit of irrational whims. Just as man is free to attempt to survive in any random manner, but will perish unless he lives as his nature requires, so he is free to seek his happiness in any mindless fraud, but the torture of frustration is all he will find, unless he seeks the happiness proper to man. The purpose of morality is to teach you, not to suffer and die, but to enjoy yourself and live.

“Sweep aside those parasites of subsidized classrooms, who live on the profits of the mind of others and proclaim that man needs no morality, no values, no code of behavior. They, who pose as scientists and claim that man is only an animal, do not grant him inclusion in the law of existence they have granted to the lowest of insects. They recognize that every living species has a way of survival demanded by its nature, they do not claim that a fish can live out of water or that a dog can live without its sense of smell-but man, they claim, the most complex of beings, man can survive in any way whatever, man has no identity, no nature, and there’s no practical reason why he cannot live with his means of survival destroyed, with his mind throttled and placed at the disposal of any orders they might care to issue.

“Sweep aside those hatred-eaten mystics, who pose as friends of humanity and preach that the highest virtue man can practice is to hold his own life as of no value. Do they tell you that the purpose of morality is to curb man’s instinct of self-preservation? It is for the purpose of self-preservation that man needs a code of morality. The only man who desires to be moral is the man who desires to live.

“No, you do not have to live; it is your basic act of choice; but if you choose to live,. you must live as a man-by the work and the judgment of your mind.

“No, you do not have to live as a man; it is an act of moral choice. But you cannot live as anything else-and the alternative is that state of living death which you now see within you and around you, the state of a thing unfit for existence, no longer human and less than animal, a thing that knows nothing but pain and drags itself through its span of years in the agony of unthinking self-destruction.

“No, you do not have to think; it is an act of moral choice. But someone had to think to keep you alive; if you choose to default, you default on existence and you pass the deficit to some moral man, expecting him to sacrifice his good for the sake of letting you survive by your evil.

“No, you do not have to be a man; but today those who are, are not there any longer. I have removed your means of survival-your victims.

“If you wish to know how I have done it and what I told them to make them quit, you are hearing it now. I told them, in essence, the statement I am making tonight. They were men who had lived by my code, but had not known how great a virtue it represented. I made them see it. I brought them, not a re-evaluation, but only an identification of their values.

“We, the men of the mind, are now on strike against you in the name of a single axiom, which is the root of our moral code, just as the root of yours is the wish to escape it: the axiom that existence exists.

“Existence exists-and the act of grasping that statement implies two corollary axioms: that something exists which one perceives and that one exists possessing consciousness, consciousness being the faculty of perceiving that which exists.

“If nothing exists, there can be no consciousness: a consciousness with nothing to be conscious of is a contradiction in terms. A consciousness conscious of nothing but itself is a contradiction in terms: before it could identify itself as consciousness, it had to be conscious of something. If that which you claim to perceive does not exist, what you possess is not consciousness.

“Whatever the degree of your knowledge, these two-existence and consciousness-are axioms you cannot escape, these two are the irreducible primaries implied in any action you undertake, in any part of your knowledge and in its sum, from the first ray of light you perceive at the start of your life to the widest erudition you might acquire at its end. Whether you know the shape of a pebble or the structure of a solar system, the axioms remain the same: that it exists and that you know it.

“To exist is to be something, as distinguished from the nothing of non-existence, it is to be an entity of a specific nature made of specific attributes. Centuries ago, the man who was-no matter what his errors-the greatest of your philosophers, has stated the formula defining the concept of existence and the rule of all knowledge: A is A. A thing is itself. You have never grasped the meaning of his statement. I am here to complete it: Existence is Identity, Consciousness is Identification.

“Whatever you choose to consider, be it an object, an attribute or an action, the law of identity remains the same. A leaf cannot be a stone at the same time, it cannot be all red and all green at the same time, it cannot freeze and burn at the same time. A is A. Or, if you wish it stated in simpler language: You cannot have your cake and eat it, too.

“Are you seeking to know what is wrong with the world? All the disasters that have wrecked your world, came from your leaders’ attempt to evade the fact that A is A. All the secret evil you dread to face within you and all the pain you have ever endured, came from your own attempt to evade the fact that A is A. The purpose of those who taught you to evade it, was to make you forget that Man is Man.

“Man cannot survive except by gaining knowledge, and reason is his only means to gain it. Reason is the faculty that perceives, identifies and integrates the material provided by his senses. The task of his senses is to give him the evidence of existence, but the task of identifying it belongs to his reason, his senses tell him only that something is, but what it is must be learned by his mind.

“All thinking is a process of identification and integration. Man perceives a blob of color; by integrating the evidence of his sight and his touch, he learns to identify it as a solid object; he learns to identify the object as a table; he learns that the table is made of wood; he learns that the wood consists of cells, that the cells consist of molecules, that the molecules consist of atoms. All through this process, the work of his mind consists of answers to a single question: What is it? His means to establish the truth of his answers is logic, and logic rests on the axiom that existence exists. Logic is the art of non-contradictory identification. A contradiction cannot exist. An atom is itself, and so is the universe; neither can contradict its own identity; nor can a part contradict the whole. No concept man forms is valid unless he integrates it without contradiction into the total sum of his knowledge. To arrive at a contradiction is to confess an error in one’s thinking; to maintain a contradiction is to abdicate one’s mind and to evict oneself from the realm of reality.

“Reality is that which exists; the unreal does not exist; the unreal is merely that negation of existence which is the content of a human consciousness when it attempts to abandon reason. Truth is the recognition of reality; reason, man’s only means of knowledge, is his only standard of truth.

“The most depraved sentence you can now utter is to ask: Whose reason? The answer is: Yours. No matter how vast your knowledge or how modest, it is your own mind that has to acquire it. It is only with your own knowledge that you can deal. It is only your own knowledge that you can claim to possess or ask others to consider. Your mind is your only judge of truth-and if others dissent from your verdict, reality is the court of final appeal. Nothing but a man’s mind can perform that complex, delicate, crucial process of identification which is thinking. Nothing can direct the process but his own judgment. Nothing can direct his judgment but his moral integrity.

“You who speak of a ‘moral instinct’ as if it were some separate endowment opposed to reason-man’s reason is his moral faculty. A process of reason is a process of constant choice in answer to the question: True or False?-Right or Wrong? Is a seed to be planted in soil in order to grow-right or wrong? Is a man’s wound to be disinfected in order to save his life-right or wrong? Does the nature of atmospheric electricity permit it to be converted into kinetic power-right or wrong? It is the answers to such questions that gave you everything you have-and the answers came from a man’s mind, a mind of intransigent devotion to that which is right.

“A rational process is a moral process. You may make an error at any step of it, with nothing to protect you but your own severity, or you may try to cheat, to fake the evidence and evade the effort of the quest-but if devotion to truth is the hallmark of morality, then there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.

“That which you call your soul or spirit is your consciousness, and that which you call ‘free will’ is your mind’s freedom to think or not, the only will you have, your only freedom, the choice that controls all the choices you make and determines your life and your character.

“Thinking is man’s only basic virtue, from which all the others proceed. And his basic vice, the source of all his evils, is that nameless act which all of you practice, but struggle never to admit: the act of blanking out, the willful suspension of one’s consciousness, the refusal to think-not blindness, but the refusal to see; not ignorance, but the refusal to know. It is the act of unfocusing your mind and inducing an inner fog to escape the responsibility of judgment-on the unstated premise that a thing will not exist if only you refuse to identify it, that A will not be A so long as you do not pronounce the verdict ‘It is.’ Non-thinking is an act of annihilation, a wish to negate existence, an attempt to wipe out reality. But existence exists; reality is not to be wiped out, it will merely wipe out the wiper. By refusing to say ‘It is,’ you are refusing to say ‘I am.’ By suspending your judgment, you are negating your person. When a man declares: ‘Who am I to know?’-he is declaring: ‘Who am I to live?’

“This, in every hour and every issue, is your basic moral choice: thinking or non-thinking, existence or non-existence, A or non-A, entity or zero.

“To the extent to which a man is rational, life is the premise directing his actions. To the extent to which he is irrational, the premise directing his actions is death.

“You who prattle that morality is social and that man would need no morality on a desert island-it is on a desert island that he would need it most. Let him try to claim, when there are no victims to pay for it, that a rock is a house, that sand is clothing, that food will drop into his mouth without cause or effort, that he will collect a harvest tomorrow by devouring his stock seed today-and reality will wipe him out, as he deserves; reality will show him that life is a value to be bought and that thinking is the only coin noble enough to buy it.

“If I were to speak your kind of language, I would say that man’s only moral commandment is: Thou shalt think. But a ‘moral commandment’ is a contradiction in terms. The moral is the chosen, not the forced; the understood, not the obeyed. The moral is the rational, and reason accepts no commandments.

“My morality, the morality of reason, is contained in a single axiom: existence exists-and in a single choice: to live. The rest proceeds from these. To live, man must hold three things as the supreme and ruling values of his life: Reason-Purpose-Self-esteem. Reason, as his only tool of knowledge-Purpose, as his choice of the happiness which that tool must proceed to achieve-Self-esteem, as his inviolate certainty that his mind is competent to think and his person is worthy of happiness, which means: is worthy of living. These three values imply and require all of man’s virtues, and all his virtues pertain to the relation of existence and consciousness: rationality, independence, integrity, honesty, justice, productiveness, pride.

“Rationality is the recognition of the fact that existence exists, that nothing can alter the truth and nothing can take precedence over that act of perceiving it, which is thinking-that the mind is one’s only judge of values and one’s only guide of action-that reason is an absolute that permits no compromise-that a concession to the irrational invalidates one’s consciousness and turns it from the task of perceiving to the task of faking reality-that the alleged short-cut to knowledge, which is faith, is only a short-circuit destroying the mind-that the acceptance of a mystical invention is a wish for the annihilation of existence and, properly, annihilates one’s consciousness.

“Independence is the recognition of the fact that yours is the responsibility of judgment and nothing can help you escape it-that no substitute can do your thinking, as no pinch-hitter can live your life-that the vilest form of self-abasement and self-destruction is the subordination of your mind to the mind of another, the acceptance of an authority over your brain, the acceptance of his assertions as facts, his say-so as truth, his edicts as middle-man between your consciousness and your existence.

“Integrity is the recognition of the fact that you cannot fake your consciousness, just as honesty is the recognition of the fact that you cannot fake existence-that man is an indivisible entity, an integrated unit of two attributes: of matter and consciousness, and that he may permit no breach between body and mind, between action and thought, between his life and his convictions-that, like a judge impervious to public opinion, he may not sacrifice his convictions to the wishes of others, be it the whole of mankind shouting pleas or threats against him-that courage and confidence are practical necessities, that courage is the practical form of being true to existence, of being true to one’s own consciousness.

“Honesty is the recognition of the fact that the unreal is unreal and can have no value, that neither love nor fame nor cash is a value if obtained by fraud-that an attempt to gain a value by deceiving the mind of others is an act of raising your victims to a position higher than reality, where you become a pawn of their blindness, a slave of their non-thinking and their evasions, while their intelligence, their rationality, their perceptiveness become the enemies you have to dread and flee-that you do not care to live as a dependent, least of all a dependent on the stupidity of others, or as a fool whose source of values is the fools he succeeds in fooling-that honesty is not a social duty, not a sacrifice for the sake of others, but the most profoundly selfish virtue man can practice: his refusal to sacrifice the reality of his own existence to the deluded consciousness of others.

“Justice is the recognition of the fact that you cannot fake the character of men as you cannot fake the character of nature, that you must judge all men as conscientiously as you judge inanimate objects, with the same respect for truth, with the same incorruptible vision, by as pure and as rational a process of identification-that every man must be judged for what he is and treated accordingly, that just as you do not pay a higher price for a rusty chunk of scrap than for a piece of shining metal, so you do not value a totter above a hero-that your moral appraisal is the coin paying men for their virtues or vices, and this payment demands of you as scrupulous an honor as you bring to financial transactions-that to withhold your contempt from men’s vices is an act of moral counterfeiting, and to withhold your admiration from their virtues is an act of moral embezzlement-that to place any other concern higher than justice is to devaluate your moral currency and defraud the good in favor of the evil, since only the good can lose by a default of justice and only the evil can profit-and that the bottom of the pit at the end of that road, the act of moral bankruptcy, is to punish men for their virtues and reward them for their vices, that that is the collapse to full depravity, the Black Mass of the worship of death, the dedication of your consciousness to the destruction of existence.

“Productiveness is your acceptance of morality, your recognition of the fact that you choose to live-that productive work is the process by which man’s consciousness controls his existence, a constant process of acquiring knowledge and shaping matter to fit one’s purpose, of translating an idea into physical form, of remaking the earth in the image of one’s values-that all work is creative work if done by a thinking mind, and no work is creative if done by a blank who repeats in uncritical stupor a routine he has learned from others- that your work is yours to choose, and the choice is as wide as your mind, that nothing more is possible to you and nothing less is human-that to cheat your way into a job bigger than your mind can handle is to become a fear-corroded ape on borrowed motions and borrowed time, and to settle down into a job that requires less than your mind’s full capacity is to cut your motor and sentence yourself to another kind of motion: decay-that your work is the process of achieving your values, and to lose your ambition for values is to lose your ambition to live-that your body is a machine, but your mind is its driver, and you must drive as far as your mind will take you, with achievement as the goal of your road-that the man who has no purpose is a machine that coasts downhill at the mercy of any boulder to crash in the first chance ditch, that the man who stifles his mind is a stalled machine slowly going to rust, that the man who lets a leader prescribe his course is a wreck being towed to the scrap heap, and the man who makes another man his goal is a hitchhiker no driver should ever pick up-that your work is the purpose of your life, and you must speed past any killer who assumes the right to stop you, that any value you might find outside your work, any other loyalty or love, can be only travelers you choose to share your journey and must be travelers going on their own power in the same direction.

“Pride is the recognition of the fact that you are your own highest value and, like all of man’s values, it has to be earned-that of any achievements open to you, the one that makes all others possible is the creation of your own character-that your character, your actions, your desires, your emotions are the products of the premises held by your mind-that as man must produce the physical values he needs to sustain his life, so he must acquire the values of character that make his life worth sustaining-that as man is a being of self-made wealth, so he is a being of self-made soul-that to live requires a sense of self-value, but man, who has no automatic values, has no automatic sense of self-esteem and must earn it by shaping his soul in the image of his moral ideal, in the image of Man, the rational being he is born able to create, but must create by choice-that the first precondition of self-esteem is that radiant selfishness of soul which desires the best in all things, in values of matter and spirit, a soul that seeks above all else to achieve its own moral perfection, valuing nothing higher than itself-and that the proof of an achieved self-esteem is your soul’s shudder of contempt and rebellion against the role of a sacrificial animal, against the vile impertinence of any creed that proposes to immolate the irreplaceable value which is your consciousness and the incomparable glory which is your existence to the blind evasions and the stagnant decay of others.

“Are you beginning to see who is John Galt? I am the man who has earned the thing you did not fight for, the thing you have renounced, betrayed, corrupted, yet were unable fully to destroy and are now hiding as your guilty secret, spending your life in apologies to every professional cannibal, lest it be discovered that somewhere within you, you still long to say what I am now saying to the hearing of the whole of mankind: I am proud of my own value and of the fact that I wish to live.

“This wish-which you share, yet submerge as an evil-is the only remnant of the good within you, but it is a wish one must learn to deserve. His own happiness is man’s only moral purpose, but only his own virtue can achieve it. Virtue is not an end in itself. Virtue is not its own reward or sacrificial fodder for the reward of evil. Life is the reward of virtue-and happiness is the goal and the reward of life.

“Just as your body has two fundamental sensations, pleasure and pain, as signs of its welfare or injury, as a barometer of its basic alternative, life or death, so your consciousness has two fundamental emotions, joy and suffering, in answer to the same alternative. Your emotions are estimates of that which furthers your life or threatens it, lightning calculators giving you a sum of your profit or loss. You have no choice about your capacity to feel that something is good for you or evil, but what you will consider good or evil, what will give you joy or pain, what you will love or hate, desire or fear, depends on your standard of value. Emotions are inherent in your nature, but their content is dictated by your mind. Your emotional capacity is an empty motor, and your values are the fuel with which your mind fills it. If you choose a mix of contradictions, it will clog your motor, corrode your transmission and wreck you on your first attempt to move with a machine which you, the driver, have corrupted.

“If you hold the irrational as your standard of value and the impossible as your concept of the good, if you long for rewards you have not earned, for a fortune, or a love you don’t deserve, for a loophole in the law of causality, for an A that becomes non-A at your whim, if you desire the opposite of existence-you will reach it. Do not cry, when you reach it, that life is frustration and that happiness is impossible to man; check your fuel: it brought you where you wanted to go.

“Happiness is not to be achieved at the command of emotional whims. Happiness is not the satisfaction of whatever irrational wishes you might blindly attempt to indulge. Happiness is a state of non-contradictory joy-a joy without penalty or guilt, a joy that does not clash with any of your values and does not work for your own destruction, not the joy of escaping from your mind, but of using your mind’s fullest power, not the joy of faking reality, but of achieving values that are real, not the joy of a drunkard, but of a producer. Happiness is possible only to a rational man, the man who desires nothing but rational goals, seeks nothing but rational values and finds his joy in nothing but rational actions.

“Just as I support my life, neither by robbery nor alms, but by my own effort, so I do not seek to derive my happiness from the injury or the favor of others, but earn it by my own achievement. Just as I do not consider the pleasure of others as the goal of my life, so I do not consider my pleasure as the goal of the lives of others. Just as there are no contradictions in my values and no conflicts among my desires-so there are no victims and no conflicts of interest among rational men, men who do not desire the unearned and do not view one another with a cannibal’s lust, men who neither make sacrifice nor accept them.

“The symbol of all relationships among such men, the moral symbol of respect for human beings, is the trader. We, who live by values, not by loot, are traders, both in matter and in spirit. A trader is a man who earns what he gets and does not give or take the undeserved. A trader does not ask to be paid for his failures, nor does he ask to be loved for his flaws. A trader does not squander his body as fodder or his soul as alms. Just as he does not give his work except in trade for material values, so he does not give the values of his spirit-his love, his friendship, his esteem-except in payment and in trade for human virtues, in payment for his own selfish pleasure, which he receives from men he can respect. The mystic parasites who have, throughout the ages, reviled the traders and held them in contempt, while honoring the beggars and the looters, have known the secret motive of their sneers: a trader is the entity they dread-a man of justice.

“Do you ask what moral obligation I owe to my fellow men? None-except the obligation I owe to myself, to material objects and to all of existence: rationality. I deal with men as my nature and their demands: by means of reason. I seek or desire nothing from them except such relations as they care to enter of their own voluntary choice. It is only with their mind that I can deal and only for my own self-interest, when they see that my interest coincides with theirs. When they don’t, I enter no relationship; I let dissenters go their way and I do not swerve from mine. I win by means of nothing but logic and I surrender to nothing but logic. I do not surrender my reason or deal with men who surrender theirs. I have nothing to gain from fools or cowards; I have no benefits to seek from human vices: from stupidity, dishonesty or fear. The only value men can offer me is the work of their mind. When I disagree with a rational man, I let reality be our final arbiter; if I am right, he will learn; if I am wrong, I will; one of us will win, but both will profit.

“Whatever may be open to disagreement, there is one act of evil that may not, the act that no man may commit against others and no man may sanction or forgive. So long as men desire to live together, no man may initiate-do you hear me? no man may start-the use of physical force against others.

“To interpose the threat of physical destruction between a man and his perception of reality, is to negate and paralyze his means of survival; to force-him to act against his own judgment, is like forcing him to act against his own sight. Whoever, to whatever purpose or extent, initiates the use of force, is a killer acting on the premise of death in a manner wider than murder: the premise of destroying man’s capacity to live.

“Do not open your mouth to tell me that your mind has convinced you of your right to force my mind. Force and mind are opposites; morality ends where a gun begins. When you declare that men are irrational animals and propose to treat them as such, you define thereby your own character and can no longer claim the sanction of reason-as no advocate of contradictions can claim it. There can be no ‘right’ to destroy the source of rights, the only means of judging right and wrong: the mind.

“To force a man to drop his own mind and to accept your will as a substitute, with a gun in place of a syllogism, with terror in place of proof, and death as the final argument-is to attempt to exist in defiance of reality. Reality demands of man that he act for his own rational interest; your gun demands of him that he act against it. Reality threatens man with death if he does not act on his rational judgment: you threaten him with death if he does. You place him into a world where the price of his life is the surrender of all the virtues required by life-and death by a process of gradual destruction is all that you and your system will achieve, when death is made to be the ruling power, the winning argument in a society of men.

“Be it a highwayman who confronts a traveler with the ultimatum: ‘Your money or your life,’ or a politician who confronts a country with the ultimatum: ‘Your children’s education or your life,’ the meaning of that ultimatum is: ‘Your mind or your life’-and neither is possible to man without the other.

“If there are degrees of evil, it is hard to say who is the more contemptible: the brute who assumes the right to force the mind of others or the moral degenerate who grants to others the right to force his mind. That is the moral absolute one does not leave open to debate. I do not grant the terms of reason to men who propose to deprive me of reason. I do not enter discussions with neighbors who think they can forbid me to think. I do not place my moral sanction upon a murderer’s wish to kill me. When a man attempts to deal with me by force, I answer him-by force.

“It is only as retaliation that force may be used and only against the man who starts its use. No, I do not share his evil or sink to his concept of morality: I merely grant him his choice, destruction, the only destruction he had the right to choose: his own. He uses force to seize a value; I use it only to destroy destruction. A holdup man seeks to gain wealth by killing me; I do not grow richer by killing a holdup man. I seek no values by means of evil, nor do I surrender my values to evil.

“In the name of all the producers who had kept you alive and received your death ultimatums in payment, I now answer you with a single ultimatum of our own: Our work or your guns. You can choose either; you can’t have both. We do not initiate the use of force against others or submit to force at their hands. If you desire ever again to live in an industrial society, it Will be on our moral terms. Our terms and our motive power are the antithesis of yours. You have been using fear as your weapon and have been bringing death to man as his punishment for rejecting your morality. We offer him life as his reward for accepting ours.

“You who are worshippers of the zero-you have never discovered that achieving life is not the equivalent of avoiding death. Joy is not ‘the absence of pain,’ intelligence is not ‘the absence of stupidity,’ light is not ‘the absence of darkness,’ an entity is not ‘the absence of a nonentity.’ Building is not done by abstaining from demolition; centuries of sitting and waiting in such abstinence will not raise one single girder for you to abstain from demolishing-and now you can no longer say to me, the builder: ‘Produce, and feed us in exchange for our not destroying your production.’ I am answering in the name of all your victims: Perish with and in your own void. Existence is not a negation of negatives. Evil, not value, is an absence and a negation, evil is impotent and has no power but that which we let it extort from us. Perish, because we have learned that a zero cannot hold a mortgage over life.

“You seek escape from pain. We seek the achievement of happiness. You exist for the sake of avoiding punishment. We exist for the sake of earning rewards. Threats will not make us function; fear is not our incentive. It is not death that we wish to avoid, but life that we wish to live.

“You, who have lost the concept of the difference, you who claim that fear and joy are incentives of equal power-and secretly add that fear is the more ‘practical’-you do not wish to live, and only fear of death still holds you to the existence you have damned. You dart in panic through the trap of your days, looking for the exit you have closed, running from a pursuer you dare not name to a terror you dare not acknowledge, and the greater your terror the greater your dread of the only act that could save you: thinking. The purpose of your struggle is not to know, not to grasp or name or hear the thing. I shall now state to your hearing: that yours is the Morality of Death.

“Death is the standard of your values, death is your chosen goal, and you have to keep running, since there is no escape from the pursuer who is out to destroy you or from the knowledge that that pursuer is yourself. Stop running, for once-there is no place to run-stand naked, as you dread to stand, but as I see you, and take a look at what you dared to call a moral code.

“Damnation is the start of your morality, destruction is its purpose, means and end. Your code begins by damning man as evil, then demands that he practice a good which it defines as impossible for him to practice. It demands, as his first proof of virtue, that he accept his own depravity without proof. It demands that he start, not with a standard of value, but with a standard of evil, which is himself, by means of which he is then to define the good: the good is that which he is not.

“It does not matter who then becomes the profiteer on his renounced glory and tormented soul, a mystic God with some incomprehensible design or any passer-by whose rotting sores are held as some inexplicable claim upon him-it does not matter, the good is not for him to understand, his duty is to crawl through years of penance, atoning for the guilt of his existence to any stray collector of unintelligible debts, his only concept of a value is a zero: the good is that which is non-man.

“The name of this monstrous absurdity is Original Sin.

“A sin without volition is a slap at morality and an insolent contradiction in terms: that which is outside the possibility of choice is outside the province of morality. If man is evil by birth, he has no will, no power to change it; if he has no will, he can be neither good nor evil; a robot is amoral. To hold, as man’s sin, a fact not open to his choice is a mockery of morality. To hold man’s nature as his sin is a mockery of nature. To punish him for a crime he committed before he was born is a mockery of justice. To hold him guilty in a matter where no innocence exists is a mockery of reason. To destroy morality, nature, justice and reason by means of a single concept is a feat of evil hardly to be matched. Yet that is the root of your code.

“Do not hide behind the cowardly evasion that man is born with free will, but with a ‘tendency’ to evil. A free will saddled with a tendency is like a game with loaded dice. It forces man to struggle through the effort of playing, to bear responsibility and pay for the game, but the decision is weighted in favor of a tendency that he had no power to escape. If the tendency is of his choice, he cannot possess it at birth; if it is not of his choice, his will is not free.

“What is the nature of the guilt that your teachers call his Original Sin? What are the evils man acquired when he fell from a state they consider perfection? Their myth declares that he ate the fruit of the tree of knowledge-he acquired a mind and became a rational being. It was the knowledge of good and evil-he became a mortal being. He was sentenced to earn his bread by his labor-he became a productive being. He was sentenced to experience desire-he acquired the capacity of sexual enjoyment. The evils for which they damn him are reason, morality, creativeness; joy-all the cardinal values of his existence. It is not his vices that their myth of man’s fall is designed to explain and condemn, it is not his errors that they hold as his guilt, but the essence of his nature as man. Whatever he was-that robot in the Garden of Eden, who existed without mind, without values, without labor, without love-he was not man.

“Man’s fall, according to your teachers, was that he gained the virtues required to live. These virtues, by their standard, are his Sin. His evil, they charge, is that he’s man. His guilt, they charge, is that he lives.

“They call it a morality of mercy and a doctrine of love for man. No, they say, they do not preach that man is evil, the evil is only that alien object: his body. No, they say, they do not wish to kill him, they only wish to make him lose his body. They seek to help him, they say, against his pain-and they point at the torture rack to which they’ve tied him, the rack with two wheels that pull him in opposite directions, the rack of the doctrine that splits his soul and body.

“They have cut man in two, setting one half against the other. They have taught him that his body and his consciousness are two enemies engaged in deadly conflict, two antagonists of opposite natures, contradictory claims, incompatible needs, that to benefit one is to injure the other, that his soul belongs to a supernatural realm, but his body is an evil prison holding it in bondage to this earth-and that the good is to defeat his body, to undermine it by years of patient struggle, digging his way to that gorgeous jail-break which leads into the freedom of the grave.

“They have taught man that he is a hopeless misfit made of two elements, both symbols of death. A body without a soul is a corpse, a soul without a body is a ghost-yet such is their image of man’s nature: the battleground of a struggle between a corpse and a ghost, a corpse endowed with some evil volition of its own and a ghost endowed with the knowledge that everything known to man is nonexistent, that only the unknowable exists.

“Do you observe what human faculty that’ doctrine was designed to ignore? It was man’s mind that had to be negated in order to make him fall apart. Once he surrendered reason, he was left at the mercy of two monsters whom he could not fathom or control: of a body moved by unaccountable instincts and of a soul moved by mystic revelations-he was left as the passively ravaged victim of a battle between a robot and a dictaphone.

“And as he now crawls through the wreckage, groping blindly for a way to live, your teachers offer him the help of a morality that proclaims that he’ll find no solution and must seek no fulfillment on earth. Real existence, they tell him, is that which he cannot perceive, true consciousness is the faculty of perceiving the non-existent-and if he is unable to understand it, that is the proof that his existence is evil and his consciousness impotent.

“As products of the split between man’s soul and body, there are two kinds of teachers of the Morality of Death: the mystics of spirit and the mystics of muscle, whom you call the spiritualists and the materialists, those who believe in consciousness without existence and those who believe in existence without consciousness. Both demand the surrender of your mind, one to their revelation, the other to their reflexes. No matter how loudly they posture in the roles of irreconcilable antagonists, their moral codes are alike, and so are their aims: in matter-the enslavement of man’s body, in spirit-the destruction of his mind.

“The good, say the mystics of spirit, is God, a being whose only definition is that he is beyond man’s power to conceive-a definition that invalidates man’s consciousness and nullifies his concepts of existence. The good, say the mystics of muscle, is Society-a thing which they define as an organism that possesses no physical form, a super-being embodied in no one in particular and everyone in general except yourself. Man’s mind, say the mystics of spirit, must be subordinated to the will of God. Man’s mind, say the mystics of muscle, must be subordinated to the will of Society. Man’s standard of value say the mystics of spirit, is the pleasure 0f God, whose standards are beyond man’s power of comprehension and must be accepted on faith. Man’s standard of value, say the mystics of muscle, is the pleasure of Society, whose standards are beyond man’s right of judgment and must be obeyed as a primary absolute. The purpose of man’s life, say both, is to become an abject zombie who serves a purpose he does not know, for reasons he is not to question. His reward, say the mystics of spirit, will be given to him beyond the grave. His reward, say the mystics of muscle, will be given on earth-to his great-grandchildren.

“Selfishness-say both-is man’s evil. Man’s good-say both-is to give up his personal desires, to deny himself, renounce himself, surrender; man’s good is to negate the life he lives. Sacrifice-cry both-is the essence of morality, the highest virtue within man’s reach.

“Whoever is now within reach of my voice, whoever is man the victim, not man the killer, I am speaking at the deathbed of your mind, at the brink of that darkness in which you’re drowning, and if there still remains within you the power to struggle to hold on to those fading sparks which had been yourself-use it now. The word that has destroyed you is ’sacrifice.’ Use the last of your strength to understand its meaning. You’re still alive. You have a chance.

“‘Sacrifice’ does not mean the rejection of the worthless, but of the precious. ‘Sacrifice’ does not mean the rejection of the evil for the sake of the good, but of the good for the sake of the evil. ‘Sacrifice’ is the surrender of that which you value in favor of that which you don’t.

“If you exchange a penny for a dollar, it is not a sacrifice; if you exchange a dollar for a penny, it is. If you achieve the career you wanted, after years of struggle, it is not a sacrifice; if you then renounce it for the sake of a rival, it is. If you own a bottle of milk and gave it to your starving child, it is not a sacrifice; if you give it to your neighbor’s child and let your own die, it is.

“If you give money to help a friend, it is not a sacrifice; if you give it to a worthless stranger, it is. If you give your friend a sum you can afford, it is not a sacrifice; if you give him money at the cost of your own discomfort, it is only a partial virtue, according to this sort of moral standard; if you give him money at the cost of disaster to yourself that is the virtue of sacrifice in full.

“If you renounce all personal desire and dedicate your life to those you love, you do not achieve full virtue: you still retain a value of your own, which is your love. If you devote your life to random strangers, it is an act of greater virtue. If you devote your life to serving men you hate-that is the greatest of the virtues you can practice.

“A sacrifice is the surrender of a value. Full sacrifice is full surrender of all values. If you wish to achieve full virtue, you must seek no gratitude in return for your sacrifice, no praise, no love, no admiration, no self-esteem, not even the pride of being virtuous; the faintest trace of any gain dilutes your virtue. If you pursue a course of action that does not taint your life by any joy, that brings you no value in matter, no value in spirit, no gain, no profit, no reward-if you achieve this state of total zero, you have achieved the ideal of moral perfection.

“You are told that moral perfection is impossible to man-and, by this standard, it is. You cannot achieve it so long as you live, but the value of your life and of your person is gauged by how closely you succeed in approaching that ideal zero which is death.

“If you start, however, as a passionless blank, as a vegetable seeking to be eaten, with no values to reject and no wishes to renounce, you will not win the crown of sacrifice. It is not a sacrifice to renounce the unwanted. It is not a sacrifice. It is not a sacrifice to give your life for others, if death is your personal desire. To achieve the virtue of sacrifice, you must want to live, you must love it, you must burn with passion for this earth and for all the splendor it can give you-you must feel the twist of every knife as it slashes your desires away from your reach and drains your love out of your body, It is not mere death that the morality of sacrifice holds out to you as an ideal, but death by slow torture.

“Do not remind me that it pertains only to this life on earth. I am concerned with no other. Neither are you.

“If you wish to save the last of your dignity, do not call your best actions a ’sacrifice’: that term brands you as immoral. If a mother buys food for her hungry child rather than a hat for herself, it is not a sacrifice: she values the child higher than the hat; but it is a sacrifice to the kind of mother whose higher value is the hat, who would prefer her child to starve and feeds him only from a sense of duty. If a man dies fighting for his own freedom, it is not a sacrifice: he is not willing to live as a slave; but it is a sacrifice to the kind of man who’s willing. If a man refuses to sell his convictions, it is not a sacrifice, unless he is the sort of man who has no convictions.

“Sacrifice could be proper only for those who have nothing to sacrifice-no values, no standards, no judgment-those whose desires are irrational whims, blindly conceived and lightly surrendered. For a man of moral stature, whose desires are born of rational values, sacrifice is the surrender of the right to the wrong, of the good to the evil.

“The creed of sacrifice is a morality for the immoral-a morality that declares its own bankruptcy by confessing that it can’t impart to men any personal stake in virtues or value, and that their souls are sewers of depravity, which they must be taught to sacrifice. By his own confession, it is impotent to teach men to be good and can only subject them to constant punishment.

“Are you thinking, in some foggy stupor, that it’s only material values that your morality requires you to sacrifice? And what do you think are material values? Matter has no value except as a means for the satisfaction of human desires. Matter is only a tool of human values. To what service are you asked to give the material tools your virtue has produced? To the service of that which you regard as evil: to a principle you do not share, to a person you do not respect, to the achievement of a purpose opposed to your own-else your gift is not a sacrifice.

“Your morality tells you to renounce the material world and to divorce your values from matter. A man whose values are given no expression in material form, whose existence is unrelated to his ideals, whose actions contradict his convictions, is a cheap little hypocrite-yet that is the man who obeys your morality and divorces his values from matter. The man who loves one woman, but sleeps with another-the man who admires the talent of a worker, but hires another-the man who considers one cause to be just, but donates his money to the support of another-the man who holds high standards of craftsmanship, but devotes his effort to the production of trash-these are the men who have renounced matter, the men who believe that the values of their spirit cannot be brought into material reality.

“Do you say it is the spirit that such men have renounced? Yes, of course. You cannot have one without the other. You are an indivisible entity of matter and consciousness. Renounce your consciousness and you become a brute. Renounce your body and you become a fake. Renounce the material world and you surrender it to evil.

“And that is precisely the goal of your morality, the duty that your code demands of you. Give to that which you do not enjoy, serve that which you do not admire, submit to that which you consider evil-surrender the world to the values of others, deny, reject, renounce your self. Your self is your mind; renounce it and you become a chunk of meat ready for any cannibal to swallow.

“It is your mind that they want you to surrender-all those who preach the creed of sacrifice, whatever their tags or their motives, whether they demand it for the sake of your soul or of your body, whether they promise you another life in heaven or a full stomach on this earth. Those who start by saying: ‘It is selfish to pursue your own wishes, you must sacrifice them to the wishes of others’-end up by saying: ‘It is selfish to uphold your convictions, you must sacrifice them to the convictions of others.

“This much is true: the most selfish of all things is the independent mind that recognizes no authority higher than its own and no value higher than its judgment of truth. You are asked to sacrifice your intellectual integrity, your logic, your reason, your standard of truth-in favor of becoming a prostitute whose standard is the greatest good for the greatest number.

“If you search your code for guidance, for an answer to the question: ‘What is the good?’-the only answer you will find is ‘The good of others.’ The good is whatever others wish, whatever you feel they feel they wish, or whatever you feel they ought to feel. ‘The good of others’ is a magic formula that transforms anything into gold, a formula to be recited as a guarantee of moral glory and as a fumigator for any action, even the slaughter of a continent. Your standard of virtue is not an object, not an act, not a principle, but an intention. You need no proof, no reasons, no success, you need not achieve in fact the good of others-all you need to know is that your motive was the good of others, not your own. Your only definition of the good is a negation: the good is the ‘non-good for me.’

“Your code-which boasts that it upholds eternal, absolute, objective moral values and scorns the conditional, the relative and the subjective-your code hands out, as its version of the absolute, the following rule of moral conduct: If you wish it, it’s evil; if others wish it, it’s good; if the motive of your action is your welfare, don’t do it; if the motive is the welfare of others, then anything goes.

“As this double-jointed, double-standard morality splits you in half, so it splits mankind into two enemy camps: one is you, the other is all the rest of humanity. You are the only outcast who has no right to wish to live. You are the only servant, the rest are the masters, you are the only giver, the rest are the takers, you are the eternal debtor, the rest are the creditors never to be paid off. You must not question their right to your sacrifice, or the nature of their wishes and their needs: their right is conferred upon them by a negative, by the fact that they are ‘non-you.’

“For those of you who might ask questions, your code provides a consolation prize and booby-trap: it is for your own happiness, it says, that you must serve the happiness of others, the only way to achieve your joy is to give it up to others, the only way to achieve your prosperity is to surrender your wealth to others, the only way to protect your life is to protect all men except yourself-and if you find no joy in this procedure, it is your own fault and the proof of your evil; if you were good, you would find your happiness in providing a banquet for others, and your dignity in existing on such crumbs as they might care to toss you.

“You who have no standard of self-esteem, accept the guilt and dare not ask the questions. But you know the unadmitted answer, refusing to acknowledge what you see, what hidden premise moves your world. You know it, not in honest statement, but as a dark uneasiness within you, while you flounder between guilty cheating and grudgingly practicing a principle too vicious to name.

“I, who do not accept the unearned, neither in values nor in guilt, am here to ask the questions you evaded. Why is it moral to serve the happiness of others, but not your own? If enjoyment is a value, why is it moral when experienced by others, but immoral when experienced by you? If the sensation of eating a cake is a value, why is it an immoral indulgence in your stomach, but a moral goal for you to achieve in the stomach of others? Why is it immoral for you to desire, but moral for others to do so? Why is it immoral to produce a value and keep it, but moral to give it away? And if it is not moral for you to keep a value, why is it moral for others to accept it? If you are selfless and virtuous when you give it, are they not selfish and vicious when they take it? Does virtue consist of serving vice? Is the moral purpose of those who are good, self-immolation for the sake of those who are evil?

“The answer you evade, the monstrous answer is: No, the takers are not evil, provided they did not earn the value you gave them. It is not immoral for them to accept it, provided they are unable to produce it, unable to deserve it, unable to give you any value in return. It is not immoral for them to enjoy it, provided they do not obtain it by right.

“Such is the secret core of your creed, the other half of your double standard: it is immoral to live by your own effort, but moral to live by the effort of others-it is immoral to consume your own product, but moral to consume the products of others-it is immoral to earn, but moral to mooch-it is the parasites who are the moral justification for the existence of the producers, but the existence of the parasites is an end in itself-it is evil to profit by achievement, but good to profit by sacrifice-it is evil to create your own happiness, but good to enjoy it at the price of the blood of others.

“Your code divides mankind into two castes and commands them to live by opposite rules: those who may desire anything and those who may desire nothing, the chosen and the demand, the riders and the carriers, the eaters and the eaten. What standard determines your caste? What passkey admits you to the moral elite? The passkey is lack of value.

“Whatever the value involved, it is your lack of it that gives you a claim upon those who don’t lack it. It is your need that gives you a claim to rewards. If you are able to satisfy your need, your ability annuls your right to satisfy it. But a need you are unable to satisfy gives you first right to the lives of mankind.

“If you succeed, any man who fails is your master; if you fail, any man who succeeds is your serf. Whether your failure is just or not, whether your wishes are rational or not, whether your misfortune is undeserved or the result of your vices, it is misfortune that gives you a right to rewards. It is pain, regardless of its nature or cause, pain as a primary absolute, that gives you a mortgage on all of existence.

“If you heal your pain by your own effort, you receive no moral credit: your code regards it scornfully as an act of self-interest. Whatever value you seek to acquire, be it wealth or food or love or rights, if you acquire it by means of your Virtue, your code does not regard it as a moral acquisition: you occasion no loss to anyone, it is a trade, not alms; a payment, not a sacrifice. The deserved belongs in the selfish, commercial realm of mutual profit; it is only the undeserved that calls for that moral transaction which consists of profit to one at the price of disaster to the other. To demand rewards for your virtue is selfish and immoral; it is your lack of virtue that transforms your demand into a moral right.

“A morality that holds need as a claim, holds emptiness-non-existence-as its standard of value; it rewards an absence, a defeat: weakness, inability, incompetence, suffering, disease, disaster, the lack, the fault, the flaw-the zero.

“Who provides the account to pay these claims? Those who are cursed for being non-zeros, each to the extent of his distance from that ideal. Since all values are the product of virtues, the degree of your virtue is used as the measure of your penalty; the degree of your faults is used as the measure of your gain. Your code declares that the rational man must sacrifice himself to the irrational, the independent man to parasites, the honest man to the dishonest, the man of justice to the unjust, the productive man to thieving loafers, the man of integrity to compromising knaves, the man of self-esteem to sniveling neurotics. Do you wonder at the meanness of soul in those you see around you? The man who achieves these virtues will not accept your moral code; the man who accepts your moral code will not achieve these virtues.

“Under a morality of sacrifice, the first value you sacrifice is morality; the next is self-esteem. When need is the standard, every man is both victim and parasite. As a victim, he must labor to fill the needs of others, leaving himself in the position of a parasite whose needs must be filled by others. He cannot approach his fellow men except in one of two disgraceful roles: he is both a beggar and a sucker.

“You fear the man who has a dollar less than you, that dollar is rightfully his, he makes you feel like a moral defrauder. You hate the man who has a dollar more than you, that dollar is rightfully yours, he makes you feel that you are morally defrauded. The man below is a source of, your guilt, the man above is a source of your frustration. You do not know what to surrender or demand, when to give and when to grab, what pleasure in life is rightfully yours and what debt is still unpaid to others-you struggle to evade, as ‘theory,’ the knowledge that by the moral standard you’ve accepted you are guilty every moment of your life, there is no mouthful of food you swallow that is not needed by someone somewhere on earth-and you give up the problem in blind resentment, you conclude that moral perfection is not to be achieved or desired, that you will muddle through by snatching as snatch can and by avoiding the eyes of the young, of those who look at you as if self-esteem were possible and they expected you to have it. Guilt is all that you retain within your soul-and so does every other man, as he goes past, avoiding your eyes. Do you wonder why your morality has not achieved brotherhood on earth or the good will of man to man?

“The justification of sacrifice, that your morality propounds, is more corrupt than the corruption it purports to justify. The motive of your sacrifice, it tells you, should be love-the love you ought to feel for every man. A morality that professes the belief that the values of the spirit are more precious than matter, a morality that teaches you to scorn a whore who gives her body indiscriminately to all men-this same morality demands that you surrender your soul to promiscuous love for all comers.

“As there can be no causeless wealth, so there can be no causeless love or any sort of causeless emotion. An emotion is a response to a face of reality, an estimate dictated by your standards. To love is to value. The man who tells you that it is possible to value without values, to love those whom you appraise as worthless, is the man who tells you that it is possible to grow rich by consuming without producing and that paper money is as valuable as gold.

“Observe that he does not expect you to feel a causeless fear. When his kind get into power, they are expert at contriving means of terror, at giving you ample cause to feel the fear by which they desire to rule you. But when it comes to love, the highest of emotions, you permit them to shriek at you accusingly that you are a moral delinquent if you’re incapable of feeling causeless love. When a man feels fear without reason, you call him to the attention of a psychiatrist; you are not so careful to protect the meaning, the nature and the dignity of love.

“Love is the expression of one’s values, the greatest reward you can earn for the moral qualities you have achieved in your character and person, the emotional price paid by one man for the joy he receives from the virtues of another. Your morality demands that you divorce your love from values and hand it down to any vagrant, not as response to his worth, but as response to his need, not as reward, but as alms, not as a payment for virtues, but as a blank check on vices. Your morality tells you that the purpose of love is to set you free of the bonds of morality, that love is superior to moral judgment, that true love transcends, forgives and survives every manner of evil in its object, and the greater the love the greater the depravity it permits to the loved. To love a man for his virtues is paltry and human, it tells you; to love him for his flaws is divine. To love those who are worthy of it is self-interest; to love the unworthy is sacrifice. You owe your love to those who don’t deserve it, and the less they deserve it, the more love you owe them-the more loathsome the object, the nobler your love-the more unfastidious your love, the greater the virtue-and if you can bring your soul to the state of a dump heap that welcomes anything on equal terms, if you can cease to value moral values, you have achieved the state of moral perfection.

“Such is your morality of sacrifice and such are the twin ideals it offers: to refashion the life of your body in the image of a human stockyard, and the life of your spirit in the image of a dump.

“Such was your goal-and you’ve reached it. Why do you now moan complaints about man’s impotence and the futility of human aspirations? Because you were unable to prosper by seeking destruction? Because you were unable to find joy by worshipping pain? Because you were unable to live by holding death as your standard of value?

“The degree of your ability to live was the degree to which you broke your moral code, yet you believe that those who preach it are friends of humanity, you damn yourself and dare not question their motives or their goals. Take a look at them now, when you face your last choice-and if you choose to perish, do so with full knowledge of how cheaply so small an enemy has claimed your life.

“The mystics of both schools, who preach the creed of sacrifice, are germs that attack you through a single sore: your fear of relying on your mind. They tell you that they possess a means of knowledge higher than the mind, a mode of consciousness superior to reason-like a special pull with some bureaucrat of the universe who gives them secret tips withheld from others. The mystics of spirit declare that they possess an extra sense you lack: this special sixth sense consists of contradicting the whole of the knowledge of your five. The mystics of muscle do not bother to assert any claim to extrasensory perception: they merely declare that your senses are not valid, and that their wisdom consists of perceiving your blindness by some manner of unspecified means. Both kinds demand that you invalidate your own consciousness and surrender yourself into their power. They offer you, as proof of their superior knowledge, the fact that they assert the opposite of everything you know, and as proof of their superior ability to deal with existence, the fact that they lead you to misery, self-sacrifice, starvation, destruction.

“They claim that they perceive a mode of being superior to your existence on this earth. The mystics of spirit call it ‘another dimension,’ which consists of denying dimensions. The mystics of muscle call it ‘the future,’ which consists of denying the present. To exist is to possess identity. What identity are they able to give to their superior realm? They keep telling you what it is not, but never tell you what it is. All their identifications consist of negating: God is that which no human mind can know, they say-and proceed to demand that you consider it knowledge-God is non-man, heaven is non-earth, soul is non-body, virtue ‘is non-profit, A is non-A, perception is non-sensory, knowledge is non-reason. Their definitions are not acts of defining, but of wiping out.

“It is only the metaphysics of a leech that would cling to the idea of a universe where a zero is a standard of identification. A leech would want to seek escape from the necessity to name its own nature-escape from the necessity to know that the substance on which it builds its private universe is blood.

“What is the nature of that superior world to which they sacrifice the world that exists? The mystics of spirit curse matter, the mystics of muscle curse profit the first wish men to profit by renouncing the earth, the second wish men to inherit the earth by renouncing all profit. Their non-material, non-profit worlds are realms where rivers run with milk and coffee, where wine spurts from rocks at their command, where pastry drops on them from clouds at the price of opening their mouth. On this material, profit-chasing earth, an enormous investment of virtue-of intelligence, integrity, energy, skill-is required to construct a railroad to carry them the distance of one mile; in their non-material, non-profit world, they travel from planet to planet at the cost of a wish. If an honest person asks them: ‘How?’-they answer with righteous scorn that a ‘how’ is the concept of vulgar realists; the concept of superior spirits is ‘Somehow.’ On this earth restricted by matter and profit, rewards are achieved by thought; in a world set free of such restrictions, rewards are achieved by wishing.

“And that is the whole of their shabby secret. The secret of all their esoteric philosophies, of all their dialectics and super-senses, of their evasive eyes and snarling words, the secret for which they destroy civilization, language, industries and lives, the secret for which they pierce their own eyes and eardrums, grind out their senses, blank out their minds, the purpose for which they dissolve the absolutes of reason, logic, matter, existence, reality-is to erect upon that plastic fog a single holy absolute: their Wish.

“The restriction they seek to escape is the law of identity. The freedom they seek is freedom from the fact that an A will remain an A, no matter what their tears or tantrums-that a river will not bring them milk, no matter what their hunger-that water will not run uphill, no matter what comforts they could gain if it did, and if they want to lift it to the roof of a skyscraper, they must do it by a process of thought and labor, in which the nature of an inch of pipe line counts, but their feelings do not-that their feelings are impotent to alter the course of a single speck of dust in space or the nature of any action they have committed.

“Those who tell you that man is unable to perceive a reality undistorted by his senses, mean that they are unwilling to perceive a reality undistorted by their feelings. ‘Things as they are’ are things as perceived by your mind; divorce them from reason and they become ‘things as perceived by your wishes.’

“There is no honest revolt against reason-and when you accept any part of their creed, your motive is to get away with something your reason would not permit you to attempt. The freedom you seek is freedom from the fact that if you stole your wealth, you are a scoundrel, no matter how much you give to charity or how many prayers you recite-that if you sleep with sluts, you’re not a worthy husband, no matter how anxiously you feel that you love our wife next morning-that you are an entity, not a series of random pieces scattered through a universe where nothing sticks and nothing commits you to anything, the universe of a child’s nightmare where identities switch and swim, where the rotter and the hero are interchangeable parts arbitrarily assumed at will-that you are a man-that you are an entity-that you are.

“No matter how eagerly you claim that the goal of your mystic wishing is a higher mode of life, the rebellion against identity is the wish for non-existence. The desire not to be anything is the desire not to be.

“Your teachers, the mystics of both schools, have reversed causality in their consciousness, then strive to reverse it in existence. They take their emotions as a cause, and their mind as a passive effect. They make their emotions their tool for perceiving reality. They hold their desires as an irreducible primary, as a fact superseding all facts. An honest man does not desire until he has identified the object of his desire. He says: ‘It is, therefore I want it.’ They say: ‘I want it, therefore it is.’

“They want to cheat the axiom of existence and consciousness, they want their consciousness to be an instrument not of perceiving but of creating existence, and existence to be not the object but the subject of their consciousness-they want to be that God they created in their image and likeness, who creates a universe out of a void by means of an arbitrary whim. But reality is not to be cheated. What they achieve is the opposite of their desire. They want an omnipotent power over existence; instead, they lose the power of the consciousness. By refusing to know, they condemn themselves to the horror of a perpetual unknown.

“Those irrational wishes that draw you to their creed, those emotions you worship as an idol, on whose altar you sacrifice the earth, that dark, incoherent passion within you, which you take as the voice of God or of your glands, is nothing more than the corpse of your mind. An emotion that clashes with your reason, an emotion that you cannot explain or control, is only the carcass of that stale thinking which you forbade your mind to revise.

“Whenever you committed the evil of refusing to think and to see, of exempting from the absolute of reality some one small wish of yours, whenever you chose to say: Let me withdraw from the judgment of reason the cookies I stole, or the existence of God, let me have my one irrational whim and I will be a man of reason about all else-that was the act of subverting your consciousness, the act of corrupting your mind. Your mind then became a fixed jury who takes orders from a secret underworld, whose verdict distorts the evidence to fit an absolute it dares not touch-and a censored reality is the result, a splintered reality where the bits you chose to see are floating among the chasms of those you didn’t, held together by that embalming fluid of the mind which is an emotion exempted from thought.

“The links you strive to drown are casual connections. The enemy you seek to defeat is the law of causality: it permits you no miracles. The law of causality is the law of identity applied to action. All actions are caused by entities. The nature of an action is caused and determined by the nature of the entities that act; a thing cannot act in contradiction to its nature. An action not caused by an entity would be caused by a zero, which would mean a zero controlling a thing, a non-entity controlling an entity, the non-existent ruling the existent-which is the universe of your teachers’ desire, the cause of their doctrines of causeless action, the reason of their revolt against reason, the goal of their morality, their politics, their economics, the ideal they strive for: the reign of the zero.

“The law of identity does not permit you to have your cake and eat it, too. The law of causality does not permit you to eat your cake before you have it. But if you drown both laws in the blanks of your mind, if you pretend to yourself and to others that you don’t see-then you can try to proclaim your right to eat your cake today and mine tomorrow, you can preach that the way to have a cake is to eat it first, before you bake it, that the way to produce is to start by consuming, that all wishers have an equal claim to all things, since nothing is caused by anything. The corollary of the causeless in matter is the unearned in spirit.

“Whenever you rebel against causality, your motive is the fraudulent desire, not to escape it, but worse: to reverse it. You want unearned love, as if love, the effect, could give you personal value, the cause-you want unearned admiration, as if admiration, the effect, could give you virtue, the cause-you want unearned wealth, as if wealth, the effect, could give you ability, the cause-you plead for mercy, mercy, not justice, as if an unearned forgiveness could wipe out the cause of your plea. And to indulge your ugly little shams, you support the doctrines of your teachers, while they run hog-wild proclaiming that spending, the effect, creates riches, the cause, that machinery, the effect, creates intelligence, the cause, that your sexual desires, the effect, create your philosophical values, the cause.

“Who pays for the orgy? Who causes the causeless? Who are the victims, condemned to remain unacknowledged and to perish in silence, lest their agony disturb your pretense that they do not exist? We are, we, the men of the mind.

“We are the cause of all the values that you covet, we who perform the process of thinking, which is the process of defining identity and discovering causal connections. We taught you to know, to speak, to produce, to desire, to love. You who abandon reason-were it not for us who preserve it, you would not be able to fulfill or even to conceive your wishes. You would not be able to desire the clothes that had not been made, the automobile that had not been invented, the money that had not been devised, as exchange for goods that did not exist, the admiration that had not been experienced for men who had achieved nothing, the love that belongs and pertains only to those who preserve their capacity to think, to choose, to value.

“You-who leap like a savage out of the jungle of your feelings to the Fifth Avenue of our New York and proclaim that you want to keep the electric lights, but to destroy the generators-it is our wealth that you use while destroying us, it is our values that you use while damning us, it is our language that you use while denying the mind.

“Just as your mystics of spirit invented their heaven in the image of our earth, omitting our existence, and promised you rewards created by miracle out of non-matter-so your modern mystics of muscle omit our existence and promise you a heaven where matter shapes itself of its own causeless will into all the rewards desired by your non-mind.

“For centuries, the mystics of spirit had existed by running a protection racket-by making life on earth unbearable, then charging you for consolation and relief, by forbidding all the virtues that make existence possible, then riding on the shoulders of your guilt, by declaring production and joy to be sins, then collecting blackmail from the sinners. We, the men of the mind, were the unnamed victims of their creed, we who were willing to break their moral code and to bear damnation for the sin of reason-we who thought and acted, while they wished and prayed-we who were moral outcasts, we who were bootleggers of life when life was held to be a crime-while they basked in moral glory for the virtue of surpassing material greed and of distributing in selfless charity the material goods produced by-blank-out.

“Now we are chained and commanded to produce by savages who do not grant us even the identification of sinners-by savages who proclaim that we do not exist, then threaten to deprive us of the life we don’t possess, if we fail to provide them with the goods we don’t produce. Now we are expected to continue running railroads and to know the minute when a train will arrive after crossing the span of a continent, we are expected to continue running steel mills and to know the molecular structure of every drop of metal in the cables of your bridges and in the body of the airplanes that support you in mid-air-while the tribes of your grotesque little mystics of muscle fight over the carcass of our world, gibbering in sounds of non-language that there are no principles, no absolutes, no knowledge, no mind.

“Dropping below the level of a savage, who believes that the magic words he utters have the power to alter reality, they believe that reality can be altered by the power of the words they do not utter-and their magic tool is the blank-out, the pretense that nothing can come into existence past the voodoo of their refusal to identify it.

“As they feed on stolen wealth in body, so they feed on stolen concepts in mind, and proclaim that honesty consists of refusing to know that one is stealing. As they use effects while denying causes, so they use our concepts while denying the roots and the existence of the concepts they are using. As they seek, not to build, but to take over industrial plants, so they seek, not to think, but to take over human thinking.

“As they proclaim that the only requirement for running a factory is the ability to turn the cranks of the machines, and blank out the question of who created the factory-so they proclaim that there are no entities, that nothing exists but motion, and blank out the fact that motion presupposes the thing which moves, that without the concept of entity, there can be no such concept as ‘motion.’ As they proclaim their right to consume the unearned, and blank out the question of who’s to produce it-so they proclaim that there is no law of identity, that nothing exists but change, and blank out the fact that change presupposes the concepts of what changes, from what and to what, that, without the law of identity no such concept as ‘change’ is possible. As they rob an industrialist while denying his value, so they seek to seize power over all of existence while denying that existence exists.

“‘We know that we know nothing,’ they chatter, blanking out the fact that they are claiming knowledge-’There are not absolutes,’ they chatter, blanking out the fact that they are uttering an absolute-’You cannot prove that you exist or that you’re conscious,’ they chatter, blanking out the fact that proof presupposes existence, consciousness and a complex chain of knowledge: the existence of something to know, of a consciousness able to know it, and of a knowledge that has learned to distinguish between such concepts as the proved and the unproved.

“When a savage who has not learned to speak declares that existence must be proved, he is asking you to prove it by means of non-existence-when he declares that your consciousness must be proved, he is asking you to prove it by means of unconsciousness-he is asking you to step into a void outside of existence and consciousness to give him proof of both-he is asking you to become a zero gaining knowledge about a zero.

“When he declares that an axiom is a matter of arbitrary choice and he doesn’t choose to accept the axiom that he exists, he blanks out the fact that he has accepted it by uttering that sentence, that the only way to reject it is to shut one’s mouth, expound no theories and die.

“An axiom is a statement that identifies the base of knowledge and of any further statement pertaining to that knowledge, a statement necessarily contained in all others, whether any particular speaker chooses to identify it or not. An axiom is a proposition that defeats its opponents by the fact that they have to accept it and use it in the process of any attempt to deny it. Let the caveman who does not choose to accept the axiom of identity, try to present his theory without using the concept of identity or any concept derived from it-let the anthropoid who does not choose to accept the existence of nouns, try to devise a language without nouns, adjectives or verbs-let the witch-doctor who does not choose to accept the validity of sensory perception, try to prove it without using the data he obtained by sensory perception-let the head-hunter who does not choose to accept the validity of logic, try to prove it without using logic-let the pigmy who proclaims that a skyscraper needs no foundation after it reaches its fiftieth story, yank the base from under his building, not yours-let the cannibal who snarls that the freedom of man’s mind was needed to create an industrial civilization, but is not needed to maintain it, be given an arrowhead and bearskin, not a university chair of economics.

“Do you think they are taking you back to dark ages? They are taking you back to darker ages than any your history has known. Their goal is not the era of pre-science, but the era of pre-language. Their purpose is to deprive you of the concept on which man’s mind, his life and his culture depend: the concept of an objective reality. Identify the development of a human consciousness-and you will know the purpose of their creed.

“A savage is a being who has not grasped that A is A and that reality is real. He has arrested his mind at the level of a baby’s, at the state when a consciousness acquires its initial sensory perception and has not learned to distinguish solid objects. It is to a baby that the world appears as a blur of motion, without things that move-and the birth of his mind is the day when he grasps that the streak that keeps flickering past him is his mother and the whirl beyond her is a curtain, that the two are solid entities and neither can turn into the other, that they are what they are, that they exist. The day when he grasps that matter has no volition is the day when he grasps that he has-and this is his birth as a human being. The day when he grasps that the reflection he sees in a mirror is not a delusion, that it is real, but it is not himself, that the mirage he sees in a desert is not a delusion, that the air and the light rays that cause it are real, but it is not a city, it is a city’s reflection-the day when he grasps that he is not a passive recipient of the sensations of any given moment, that his senses do not provide him with automatic knowledge in separate snatches independent of context, but only with the material of knowledge, which his mind must learn to integrate-the day when he grasps that his senses cannot deceive him, that physical objects cannot act without causes, that his organs of perception are physical and have no volition, no power to invent or to distort, that the evidence they give him is an absolute, but his mind must learn to understand it, his mind must discover the nature, the causes, the full context of his sensory material, his mind must identify the things that he perceives-that is the day of his birth as a thinker and scientist.

“We are the men who reach that day; you are the men who choose to reach it partly; a savage is a man who never does.

“To a savage, the world is a place of unintelligible miracles where anything is possible to inanimate matter and nothing is possible to him. His world is not the unknown, but that irrational horror: the unknowable. He believes that physical objects are endowed with a mysterious volition, moved by causeless, unpredictable whims, while he is a helpless pawn at the mercy of forces beyond his control. He believes that nature is ruled by demons who possess an omnipotent power and that reality is their fluid plaything, where they can turn his bowl of meal into a snake and his wife into a beetle at any moment, where the A he has never discovered can be any non-A they choose, where the only knowledge he possesses is that he must not attempt to know. He can count on nothing, he can only wish, and he spends his life on wishing, on begging his demons to grant him his wishes by the arbitrary power of their will, giving them credit when they do, taking the blame when they don’t, offering them sacrifices in token of his gratitude and sacrifices in token of his guilt, crawling on his belly in fear and worship of sun and moon and wind and rain and of any thug who announces himself as their spokesman, provided his words are unintelligible and his mask sufficiently frightening-he wishes, begs and crawls, and dies, leaving you, as a record of his view of existence, the distorted monstrosities of his idols, part-man, part-animal, part-spider, the embodiments of the world of non-A.

“His is the intellectual state of your modern teachers and his is the world to which they want to bring you.

“If you wonder by what means they propose to do it, walk into any college classroom and you will hear your professors teaching your children that man can be certain of nothing, that his consciousness has no validity whatever, that he can learn no facts and no laws of existence, that he’s incapable of knowing an objective reality. What, then, is his standard of knowledge and truth? Whatever others believe, is their answer. There is no knowledge, they teach, there’s only faith: your belief that you exist is an act of faith, no more valid than another’s faith in his right to kill you; the axioms of science are an act of faith, no more valid than a mystic’s faith in revelations; the belief that electric light can be produced by ‘a generator is an act of faith, no more valid than the belief that it can be produced by a rabbit’s foot kissed under a stepladder on the first of the moon-truth is whatever people want it to be, and people are everyone except yourself; reality is whatever people choose to say it is, there are no objective facts, there are only people’s arbitrary wishes-a man who seeks knowledge in a laboratory by means of test tubes and logic is an old-fashioned, superstitious fool; a true scientist is a man who goes around taking public polls-and if it weren’t for the selfish greed of the manufacturers of steel girders, who have a vested interest in obstructing the progress of science, you would learn that New York City does not exist, because a poll of the entire population of the world would tell you by a landslide majority that their beliefs forbid its existence.

“For centuries, the mystics of spirit have proclaimed that faith is superior to reason, but have not dared deny the existence of reason. Their heirs and products, the mystics of muscle, have completed their job and achieved their dream: they proclaim that everything is faith, and call it a revolt against believing. As revolt against unproved assertions, they proclaim that nothing can be proved; as revolt against supernatural knowledge, they proclaim that no knowledge is possible; as-revolt against the enemies of science, they proclaim that science is superstition; as revolt against the enslavement of the mind, they proclaim that there is no mind.

“If you surrender your power to perceive, if you accept the switch of your standard from the objective to the collective and wait for mankind to tell you what to think, you will find another switch taking place before the eyes you have renounced: you will find that your teachers become the rulers of the collective, and if you then refuse to obey them, protesting that they are not the whole of mankind, they will answer: ‘By what means do you know that we are not? Are, brother? Where did you get that old-fashioned term?’

“If you doubt that such is their purpose, observe with what passionate consistency the mystics of muscle are striving to make you forget that a concept such as ‘Mind’ has ever existed. Observe the twists of undefined verbiage, the words with rubber meanings, the terms left floating in midstream, by means of which they try to get around the recognition of the concept of ‘thinking.’ Your consciousness, they tell you, consists of ‘reflexes,’ ‘reactions,’ ‘experiences,’ ‘urges,’ and ‘drives’-and refuse to identify the means by which they acquired that knowledge, to identify the act they are performing when they tell it or the act you are performing when you listen. Words have the power to ‘consider’ you, they say and refuse to identify the reason why words have the power to change your-blank-out. A student reading a book understands it through a process of-blank-out. A scientist working on an invention is engaged in the activity of-blank-out. A psychologist helping a neurotic to solve a problem and untangle a conflict, does it by means of-blank-out. An industrialist-blank-out-there is no such person. A factory is a ‘natural resource,’ like a tree, a rock or a mud puddle.

“The problem of production, they tell you, has been solved and deserves no study or concern; the only problem left for your ‘reflexes’ to solve is now the problem of distribution. Who solved the problem of production? Humanity, they answer. What was the solution? The goods are here. How did they get here? Somehow. What caused it? Nothing has causes.

“They proclaim that every man born is entitled to exist without labor and, the laws of reality to the contrary notwithstanding, is entitled to receive his ‘minimum sustenance’-his food, his clothes, his shelter-with no effort on his part, as his due and his birthright. To receive it-from whom? Blank-out. Every man, they announce, owns an equal share of the technological benefits created in the world. Created-by whom? Blank-out. Frantic cowards who posture as defenders of industrialists now define the purpose of economics as ‘an adjustment between the unlimited desires of men and the goods supplied in limited quantity.’ Supplied-by whom? Blank-out. Intellectual hoodlums who pose as professors, shrug away the thinkers of the past by declaring that their social theories were based on the impractical assumption that man was a rational being-but since men are not rational, they declare, there ought to be established a system that will make it possible for them to exist while being irrational, which means: while defying reality. Who will make it possible? Blank-out. Any stray mediocrity rushes into print with plans to control the production of mankind-and whoever agrees or disagrees with his statistics, no one questions his right to enforce his plans by means of a gun. Enforce-on whom? Blank-out. Random females with causeless incomes titter on trips around the globe and return to deliver the message that the backward peoples of the world demand a higher standard of living. Demand-of whom? Blank-out.

“And to forestall any inquiry into the cause of the difference between a jungle village and New York City, they resort to the ultimate obscenity of explaining man’s industrial progress-skyscrapers, cable bridges, power motors, railroad trains-by declaring that man is an animal who possesses an ‘instinct of tool-making.’

“Did you wonder what is wrong with the world? You are now seeing the climax of the creed of the uncaused and unearned. All your gangs of mystics, of spirit or muscle, are fighting one another for power to rule you, snarling that love is the solution for all the problems of your spirit and that a whip is the solution for all the problems of your body-you who have agreed to have no mind. Granting man less dignity than they grant to cattle, ignoring what an animal trainer could tell them-that no animal can be trained by fear, that a tortured elephant will trample its torturer, but will not work for him or carry his burdens-they expect man to continue to produce electronic tubes, supersonic airplanes, atom-smashing engines and interstellar telescopes, with his ration of meat for reward and a lash on his back for incentive.

“Make no mistake about the character of mystics. To undercut your consciousness has always been their only purpose throughout the ages-and power, the power to rule you by force, has always been their only lust.

“From the rites of the jungle witch-doctors, which distorted reality into grotesque absurdities, stunted the minds of their victims and kept them in terror of the supernatural for stagnant stretches of centuries-to the supernatural doctrines of the Middle Ages, which kept men huddling on the mud floors of their-hovels, in terror that the devil might steal the soup they had worked eighteen hours to earn-to the seedy little smiling professor who assures you that your brain has no capacity to think, that you have no means of perception and must blindly obey the omnipotent will of that supernatural force: Society-all of it is the same performance for the same and only purpose: to reduce you to the kind of pulp that has surrendered the validity of its consciousness.

“But it cannot be done to you without your consent. If you permit it to be done, you deserve it.

“When you listen to a mystic’s harangue on the impotence of the human mind and begin to doubt your consciousness, not his, when you permit your precariously semi-rational state to be shaken by any assertion and decide it is safer to trust his superior certainty and knowledge, the joke is on both of you: your sanction is the only source of certainty he has. The supernatural power that a mystic dreads, the unknowable spirit he worships, the consciousness he considers omnipotent is-yours.

“A mystic is a man who surrendered his mind at its first encounter with the minds of others. Somewhere in the distant reaches of his childhood, when his own understanding of reality clashed with the assertions of others, with their arbitrary orders and contradictory demands, he gave in to so craven a fear of independence that he renounced his rational faculty. At the crossroads of the choice between ‘I know’ and ‘They say,’ he chose the authority of others, he chose to submit rather than to understand, to believe rather than to think. Faith in the supernatural begins as faith in the superiority of others. His surrender took the form of the feeling that he must hide his lack of understanding, that others possess some mysterious knowledge of which he alone is deprived, that reality is whatever they want it to be, through some means forever denied to him.

“From then on, afraid to think, he is left at the mercy of unidentified feelings. His feelings become his only guide, his only remnant of personal identity, he clings to them with ferocious possessiveness-and whatever thinking he does is devoted to the struggle of hiding from himself that the nature of his feelings is terror.

“When a mystic declares that he feels the existence of a power superior to reason, he feels it all right, but that power is not an omniscient super-spirit of the universe, it is the consciousness of any passer-by to whom he has surrendered his own. A mystic is driven by the urge to impress, to cheat, to flatter, to deceive, to force that omnipotent consciousness of others. ‘They’ are his only key to reality, he feels that he cannot exist save by harnessing their mysterious power and extorting their unaccountable consent. ‘They’ are his only means of perception and, like a blind man who depends on the sight of a dog, he feels he must leash them in order to live. To control the consciousness of others becomes his only passion; power-lust is a weed that grows only in the vacant lots of an abandoned mind.

“Every dictator is a mystic, and every mystic is a potential dictator. A mystic craves obedience from men, not their agreement. He wants them to surrender their consciousness to his assertions, his edicts, his wishes, his whims-as his consciousness is surrendered to theirs. He wants to deal with men by means of faith and force-he finds no satisfaction in their consent if he must earn it by means of facts and reason. Reason is the enemy he dreads and, simultaneously, considers precarious: reason, to him, is a means of deception, he feels that men possess some power more potent than reason-and only their causeless belief or their forced obedience can give him a sense of security, a proof that he has gained control of the mystic endowment he lacked. His lust is to command, not to convince: conviction requires an act of independence and press on the absolute of an objective reality. What he seeks is power over reality and over men’s means of perceiving it, their mind, the power to interpose his will between existence and consciousness, as if, by agreeing to fake the reality he orders them to fake, men would, in fact, create it.

“Just as the mystic is a parasite in matter, who expropriates the wealth created by others-just as he is a parasite in spirit, who plunders the ideas created by others-so he falls below the level of a lunatic who creates his own distortion of reality, to the level of a parasite of lunacy who seeks a distortion created by others.

“There is only one state that fulfills the mystic’s longing for infinity, non-causality, non-identity: death. No matter what unintelligible causes he ascribes to his incommunicable feelings, whoever rejects reality rejects existence-and the feelings that move him from then on are hatred for all the values of man’s life, and lust for all the evils that destroy it. A mystic relishes the spectacle of suffering, of poverty, subservience and terror; these give him a feeling of triumph, a proof of the defeat of rational reality. But no other reality exists.

“No matter whose welfare he professes to serve, be it the welfare of God or of that disembodied gargoyle he describes as ‘The People,’ no matter what ideal he proclaims in terms of some supernatural dimension-in fact, in reality, on earth, his ideal is death, his craving is to kill, his only satisfaction is to torture.

“Destruction is the only end that the mystics’ creed has ever achieved, as it is the only end that, you see them achieving today, and if the ravages wrought by their acts have not made them question their doctrines, if they profess to be moved by love, yet are not deterred by piles of human corpses, it is because the truth about their souls is worse than the obscene excuse you have allowed them, the excuse that the end justifies the means and that the horrors they practice are means to nobler ends. The truth is that those horrors are their ends.

“You who’re depraved enough to believe that you could adjust yourself to a mystic’s dictatorship and could please him by obeying his orders-there is no way to please him; when you obey, he will reverse his orders; he seeks obedience for the sake of obedience and destruction for the sake of destruction. You who are craven enough to believe that you can make terms with a mystic by giving in to his extortions-there is no way to buy him off, the bribe he wants is your life, as slowly or as fast as you are willing to give it in-and the monster he seeks to bribe is the hidden blank-out in his mind, which drives him to kill in order not to learn that the death he desires is his own.

“You who are innocent enough to believe that the forces let loose in your world today are moved by greed for material plunder-the mystics’ scramble for spoils is only a screen to conceal from their mind the nature of their motive. Wealth is a means of human life, and they clamor for wealth in imitation of living beings, to pretend to themselves that they desire to live, but their swinish indulgence in plundered luxury is not enjoyment, it is escape. They do not want to own your fortune, they want you to lose it; they do not want to succeed, they want you to fail; they do not want to live, they want you to die; they desire nothing, they hate existence, and they keep running, each trying not to learn that the object of his hatred is himself.

“You who’ve never grasped the nature of evil, you who describe them as ‘misguided idealists’-may the God you invented forgive you!-they are the essence of evil, they, those anti-living objects who seek, by devouring the world, to fill the selfless zero of their soul. It is not your wealth that they’re after. Theirs is a conspiracy against the mind, which means: against life and man.

“It is a conspiracy without leader or direction, and the random little thugs of the moment who cash in on the agony of one land or another are chance scum riding the torrent from the broken dam of the sewer of centuries, from the reservoir of hatred for reason, for logic, for ability, for achievement, for joy, stored by every whining anti-human who ever preached the superiority of the ‘heart’ over the mind.

“It is a conspiracy of all those who seek, not to live, but to get away with living, those who seek to cut just one small corner of reality and are drawn, by feeling, to all the others who are busy cutting other corners-a conspiracy that unites by links of evasion all those who pursue a zero as a value: the professor who, unable to think, takes pleasure in crippling the mind of his students, the businessman who, to protect his stagnation, takes pleasure in chaining the ability of competitors, the neurotic who, to defend his self-loathing, takes pleasure in breaking men of self-esteem, the incompetent who takes pleasure in defeating achievement, the mediocrity who takes pleasure in demolishing greatness, the eunuch who takes pleasure in the castration of all pleasure-and all their intellectual munition-makers, all those who preach that the immolation of virtue will transform vices into virtue. Death is the premise at the root of their theories, death is the goal of their actions in practice-and you are the last of their victims.

“We, who are the living buffers between you and the nature of your creed, are no longer there to save you from the effects of your chosen beliefs. We are no longer willing to pay with our lives the debts you incurred in yours or the moral deficit piled up by all the generations behind you. You had been living on borrowed time-and I am the man who has called in the loan.

“I am the man whose existence your blank-outs were intended to permit you to ignore. I am the man whom you did not want either to live or to die. You did not want me to live, because you were afraid of knowing that I carried the responsibility you dropped and that your lives depended upon me; you did not want me to die, because you knew it.

“Twelve years ago, when I worked in your world, I was an inventor. I was one of a profession that came last in human history and will be first to vanish on the way back to the sub-human. An inventor is a man who asks ‘Why?’ of the universe and lets nothing stand between the answer and his mind.

“Like the man who discovered the use of steam or the man who discovered the use oil, I discovered a source of energy which was available since the birth of the globe, but which men had not known how to use except as an object of worship, of terror and of legends without a thundering god. I completed the experimental model of a motor that would have made a fortune for me and for those who had hired me, a motor that would have raised the efficiency of every human installation using power and would have added the gift of higher productivity to every hour you spend at earning your living.

“Then, one night at a factory meeting, I heard myself sentenced to death by reason of my achievement. I heard three parasites assert that my brain and my life were their property, that my right to exist was conditional and depended on the satisfaction of their desires. The purpose of my ability, they said, was to serve the needs of those who were less able. I had no right to live, they said, by reason of my competence for living: their right to live was unconditional, by reason of their incompetence.

“Then I saw what was wrong with the world, I saw what destroyed men and nations, and where the battle for life had to be fought. I saw that the enemy was an inverted morality-and that my sanction was its only power. I saw that evil was impotent-that evil was the irrational, the blind, the anti-real-and that the only weapon of its triumph was the willingness of the good to serve it. Just as the parasites around me were proclaiming their helpless dependence on my mind and were expecting me voluntarily to accept a slavery they had no power to enforce, just as they were counting on my self-immolation to provide them with the means of their plan-so throughout the world and throughout men’s history, in every version and form, from the extortions of loafing relatives to the atrocities of collective countries, it is the good, the able, the men of reason, who act as their own destroyers, who transfuse to evil the blood of their virtue and let evil transmit to them the poison of destruction, thus gaining for evil the power of survival, and for their own values-the impotence of death. I saw that there comes a point, in the defeat of any man of virtue, when his own consent is needed for evil to win-and that no manner of injury done to him by others can succeed if he chooses to withhold his consent. I saw that I could put an end to your outrages by pronouncing a single word in my mind. I pronounced it. The word was ‘No.’

“I quit that factory. I quit your world, I made it my job to warn your victims and to give them the method and the weapon to fight you. The method was to refuse to deflect retribution. The weapon was justice.

“If you want to know what you lost when I quit and when my strikers deserted your world-stand on an empty stretch of soil in a wilderness unexplored by men and ask yourself what manner of survival you would achieve and how long you would last if you refused to think, with no one around to teach you the motions, or, if you chose to think, how much your mind would be able to discover-ask yourself how many independent conclusions you have reached in the course of your life and how much of your time was spent on performing the actions you learned from others-ask yourself whether you would be able to discover how to till the soil and grow your food, whether you would be able to invent a wheel, a lever, an induction coil, a generator, an electronic tube-then decide whether men of ability are exploiters who live by the fruit of your labor and rob you of the wealth that you produce, and whether you dare to believe that you possess the power to enslave them. Let your women take a look at a jungle female with her shriveled face and pendulous breasts, as she sits grinding meal in a bowl, hour after hour, century by century-then let them ask themselves whether their ‘instinct of tool-making’ will provide them with their electric refrigerators, their washing machines and vacuum cleaners, and, if not, whether they care to destroy those who provided it all, but not ‘by instinct.’

“Take a look around you, you savages who stutter that ideas are created by men’s means of production, that a machine is not the product of human thought, but a mystical power that produces human thinking. You have never discovered the industrial age-and you cling to the morality of the barbarian eras when a miserable form of human subsistence was produced by the muscular labor of slaves. Every mystic had always longed for slaves, to protect him from the material reality he dreaded. But you, you grotesque little atavists, stare blindly at the skyscrapers and smokestacks around you and dream of enslaving the material providers who are scientists, inventors, industrialists. When you clamor for public ownership of the means of production, you are clamoring for public ownership of the mind. I have taught my strikers that the answer you deserve is only: ‘Try and get it.’

“You proclaim yourself unable to harness the forces of inanimate matter, yet propose to harness the minds of men who are able to achieve the feats you cannot equal. You proclaim that you cannot survive without us, yet propose to dictate the terms of our survival. You proclaim that you need us, yet indulge the impertinence of asserting your right to rule us by force-and expect that we, who are not afraid of that physical nature which fills you with terror, will cower at the sight of any lout who has talked you into voting him a chance to command us.

“You propose to establish a social order based on the following tenets: that you’re incompetent to run your own life, but competent to run the lives of others-that you’re unfit to exist in freedom, but fit to become an omnipotent ruler-that you’re unable to earn your living by the use of your own intelligence, but able to judge politicians and to vote them into jobs of total power over arts you have never seen, over sciences you have never studied, over achievements of which you have no knowledge, over the gigantic industries where you, by your own definition of your capacity, would be unable successfully to fill the job of assistant greaser.

“This idol of your cult of zero-worship, this symbol of impotence-the congenital dependent-is your image of man and your standard of value, in whose likeness you strive to refashion your soul. ‘It’s only human,’ you cry in defense of any depravity, reaching the stage of self-abasement where you seek to make the concept ‘human’ mean the weakling, the fool, the rotter, the liar, the failure, the coward, the fraud, and to exile from the human race the hero, the thinker, the producer, the inventor, the strong, the purposeful, the pure-as if ‘to feel’ were human, but to think were not, as if to fail were human, but to succeed were not, as if corruption were human, but virtue were not-as if the premise of death were proper to man, but the premise of life were not.

“In order to deprive us of honor, that you may then deprive us of our wealth, you have always regarded us as slaves who deserve no moral recognition. You praise any venture that claims to be non-profit, and damn the men who made the profits that make the venture possible. You regard as ‘in the public interest’ any project serving those who do not pay; it is not in the public interest to provide any services for those who do the paying. ‘Public benefit’ is anything given as alms; to engage in trade is to injure the public. ‘Public welfare’ is the welfare of those who do not earn it; those who do, are entitled to no welfare. ‘The public,’ to you, is whoever has failed to achieve any virtue or value; whoever achieves it, whoever provides the goods you require for survival, ceases to be regarded as part of the public or as part of the human race.

“What blank-out permitted you to hope that you could get away with this muck of contradictions and to plan it as an ideal society, when the ‘No’ of your victims was sufficient to demolish the whole of your structure? What permits any insolent beggar to wave his sores in the face of his betters and to plead for help in the tone of a threat? You cry, as he does, that you are counting on our pity, but your secret hope is the moral code that has taught you to count on our guilt. You expect us to feel guilty of our virtues in the presence of your vices, wounds and failures-guilty of succeeding at existence, guilty of enjoying the life that you damn, yet beg us to help you to live.

“Did you want to know who is John Galt? I am the first man of ability who refused to regard it as guilt. I am the first man who would not do penance for my virtues or let them be used as the tools of my destruction. I am the first man who would not suffer martyrdom at the hands of those who wished me to perish for the privilege of keeping them alive. I am the first man who told them that I did not need them, and until they learned to deal with me as traders, giving value for value, they would have to exist without me, as I would exist without them; then I would let them learn whose is the need and whose the ability-and if human survival is the standard, whose terms would set the way to survive.

“I have done by plan and intention what has been done throughout history by silent default. There have always been men of intelligence who went on strike, in protest and despair, but they did not know the meaning of their action. The man who retires from public life, to think, but not to share his thoughts-the man who chooses to spend his years in the obscurity of menial employment, keeping to himself the fire of his mind, never giving it form, expression or reality, refusing to bring it into a world he despises-the man who is defeated by revulsion, the man who renounces before he has started, the man who gives up rather than give in, the man who functions at a fraction of his capacity, disarmed by his longing for an ideal he has not found-they are on strike, on strike against unreason, on strike against your world and your values. But not knowing any values of their own, they abandon the quest to know-in the darkness of their hopeless indignation, which is righteous without knowledge of the fight, and passionate without knowledge of desire, they concede to you the power of reality and surrender the incentives of their mind-and they perish in bitter futility, as rebels who never learned the object of their rebellion, as lovers who never discovered their love.

“The infamous times you call the Dark Ages were an era of intelligence on strike, when men of ability went underground and lived undiscovered, studying in secret, and died; destroying the works of their mind, when only a few of the bravest of martyrs remained to keep the human race alive. Every period ruled by mystics was an era of stagnation and want, when most men were on strike against existence, working for less than their barest survival, leaving nothing but scraps for their rulers to loot, refusing to think, to venture, to produce, when the ultimate collector of their profits and the final authority on truth or error was the whim of some gilded degenerate sanctioned as superior to reason by divine right and by grace of a club. The road of human history was a string of blank-outs over sterile stretches eroded by faith and force, with only a few brief bursts of sunlight, when the released energy of the men of the mind performed the wonders you gaped at, admired and promptly extinguished again.

“But there will be no extinction, this time. The game of the mystics is up. You will perish in and by your own unreality. We, the men of reason, will survive.

“I have called out on strike the kind of martyrs who had never deserted you before. I have given them the weapon they had lacked: the knowledge of their own moral value. I have taught them that the world is ours, whenever we choose to claim it, by virtue and grace of the fact that ours is the Morality of Life. They, the great victims who had produced all the wonders of humanity’s brief summer, they, the industrialists, the conquerors of matter, had not discovered the nature of their right. They had known that theirs was the power. I taught them that theirs was the glory.

“You, who dare to regard us as the moral inferiors of any mystic who claims supernatural visions-you, who scramble like vultures for plundered pennies, yet honor a fortune-teller above a fortune-maker-you, who scorn a businessman as ignoble, but esteem any posturing artist as exalted-the root of your standards is that mystic miasma which comes from primordial swamps, that cult of death, which pronounces a businessman immoral by reason of the fact that he keeps you alive. You, who claim that you long to rise above the crude concerns of the body, above the drudgery of serving mere physical needs-who is enslaved by physical needs: the Hindu who labors from sunrise to sunset at the shafts of a hand-plow for a bowl of rice, or the American who is driving a tractor? Who is the conqueror of physical reality: the man who sleeps on a bed of nails or the man who sleeps on an inner-spring mattress? Which is the monument to the triumph of the human spirit over matter: the germ-eaten hovels on the shorelines of the Ganges or the Atlantic skyline of New York?

“Unless you learn the answers to these questions-and learn to stand at reverent attention when you face the achievements of man’s mind-you will not stay much longer on this earth, which we love and will not permit you to damn. You will not sneak by with the rest of your lifespan. I have foreshortened the usual course of history and have let you discover the nature of the payment you had hoped to switch to the shoulders of others. It is the last of your own living power that will now be drained to provide the unearned for the worshippers and carriers of Death. Do not pretend that a malevolent reality defeated you-you were defeated by your own evasions. Do not pretend that you will perish for a noble ideal-you will perish as fodder for the haters of man.

“But to those of you who still retain a remnant of the dignity and will to love one’s life, I am offering the chance to make a choice. Choose whether you wish to perish for a morality you have never believed or practiced. Pause on the brink of self-destruction and examine your values and your life. You had known how to take an inventory of your wealth. Now take an inventory of your mind.

“Since childhood, you have been hiding the guilty secret that you feel no desire to be moral, no desire to seek self-immolation, that you dread and hate your code, but dare not say it even to yourself, that you’re devoid of those moral ‘instincts’ which others profess to feel. The less you felt, the louder you proclaimed your selfless love and servitude to others, in dread of ever letting them discover your own self, the self that you betrayed, the self that you kept in concealment, like a skeleton in the closet of your body. And they, who were at once your dupes and your deceivers, they listened and voiced their loud approval, in dread of ever letting you discover that they were harboring the same unspoken secret. Existence among you is a giant pretense, an act you all perform for one another, each feeling that he is the only guilty freak, each placing his moral authority in the unknowable known only to others, each faking the reality he feels they expect him to fake, some having the courage to break the vicious circle.

“No matter what dishonorable compromise you’ve made with your impracticable creed, no matter what miserable balance, half-cynicism, half-superstition, you now manage to maintain, you still preserve the root, the lethal tenet: the belief that the moral and the practical are opposites. Since childhood, you have been running from the terror of a choice you have never dared fully to identify: If the practical, whatever you must practice to exist, whatever works, succeeds, achieves your purpose, whatever brings you food and joy, whatever profits you, is evil-and if the good, the moral, is the impractical, whatever fails, destroys, frustrates, whatever injures you and brings you loss or pain-then your choice is to be moral or to live.

“The sole result of that murderous doctrine was to remove morality from life. You grew up to believe that moral laws bear no relation to the job of living, except as an impediment and threat, that man’s existence is an amoral jungle where anything goes and anything works. And in that fog of switching definitions which descends upon a frozen mind, you have forgotten that the evils damned by your creed were the virtues required for living, and you have come to believe that actual evils are the practical means of existence. Forgetting that the impractical ‘good’ was self-sacrifice, you believe that self-esteem is impractical; forgetting that the practical ‘evil’ was production, you believe that robbery is practical.

“Swinging like a helpless branch in the wind of an uncharted moral wilderness, you dare not fully to be evil or fully to live. When you are honest, you feel the resentment of a sucker; when you cheat, you feel terror and shame, your pain is augmented by the feeling that pain is your natural state. You pity the men you admire, you believe they are doomed to fail; you envy the men you hate, you believe they are the masters of existence. You feel disarmed when you come up against a scoundrel: you believe that evil is bound to win, since the moral is the impotent, the impractical.

“Morality, to you, is a phantom scarecrow made of duty, of boredom, of punishment, of pain, a cross-breed between the first schoolteacher of your past and the tax collector of your present, a scarecrow standing in a barren field, waving a stick to chase away your pleasures-and pleasure, to you, is a liquor-soggy brain, a mindless slut, the stupor of a moron who stakes his cash on some animal’s race, since pleasure cannot be moral.

“If you identify your actual belief, you will find a triple damnation-of yourself, of life, of virtue-in the grotesque conclusion you have reached: you believe that morality is a necessary evil.

“Do you wonder why you live without dignity, love without fire and die without resistance? Do you wonder why, wherever you look, you see nothing but unanswerable questions, why your life is tom by impossible conflicts, why you spend it straddling irrational fences to evade artificial choices, such as soul or body, mind or heart, security or freedom, private profit or public good?

“Do you cry that you find no answers? By what means did you hope to find them? You reject your tool of perception-your mind-then complain that the universe is a mystery. You discard your key, then wail that all doors are locked against you. You start out in pursuit of the irrational, then damn existence for making no sense.

“The fence you have been straddling for two hours-while hearing my words and seeking to escape them-is the coward’s formula contained in the sentence: ‘But we don’t have to go to extremes!’ The extreme you have always struggled to avoid is the recognition that reality is final, that A is A and that the truth is true. A moral code impossible to practice, a code that demands imperfection or death, has taught you to dissolve all ideas in fog, to permit no firm definitions, to regard any concept as approximate and any rule of conduct as elastic, to hedge on any principle, to compromise on any value, to take the middle of any road. By extorting your acceptance of supernatural absolutes, it has forced you to reject the absolute of nature. By making moral judgments impossible, it has made you incapable of rational judgment. A code that forbids you to cast the first stone, has forbidden you to admit the identity of stones and to know when or if you’re being stoned.

“The man who refuses to judge, who neither agrees nor disagrees, who declares that there are no absolutes and believes that he escapes responsibility, is the man responsible for all the blood that is now spilled in the world. Reality is an absolute, existence is an absolute, a speck of dust is an absolute and so is a human life. Whether you live or die is an absolute. Whether you have a piece of bread or not, is an absolute. Whether you eat your break or see it vanish into a looter’s stomach, is an absolute.

“There are two sides to every issue: one side is right and the other is wrong, but the middle is always evil. The man who is wrong still retains some respect for truth, if only by accepting the responsibility of choice. But the man in the middle is the knave who blanks out the truth in order to pretend that no choice or values exist, who is willing to sit out the course of any battle, willing to cash in on the blood of the innocent or to crawl on his belly to the guilty, who dispenses justice by condemning both the robber and the robbed to jail, who shoves conflicts by ordering the thinker and the fool to meet each other halfway. In any compromise between food and poison, it is only death that can win. In any compromise between good and evil, it is only evil that can profit. In that transfusion of blood which drains the good to feed the evil, the compromiser is the transmitting rubber tube.

“You, who are half-rational, half-coward, have been playing a con game with reality, but the victim you have conned is yourself. When men reduce their virtues to the approximate, then evil acquires the force of an absolute, when loyalty to an unyielding purpose is dropped by the virtuous, it’s picked up by scoundrels-and you get the indecent spectacle of a cringing, bargaining, traitorous good and a self-righteously uncompromising evil. As you surrendered to the mystics of muscle when they told you that ignorance consists of claiming knowledge, so now you surrender to them when they shriek that immorality consists of pronouncing moral judgment. When they yell that it is selfish to be certain that you are right, you hasten to assure them that you’re certain of nothing. When they shout that it’s immoral to stand on your convictions, you assure them that you have no convictions whatever. When the thugs of Europe’s People’s States snarl that you are guilty of intolerance, because you don’t treat your desire to live and their desire to kill you as a difference of opinion-you cringe and hasten to assure them that you are not intolerant of any horror. When some barefoot bum in some pesthole of Asia yells at you: How dare you be rich-you apologize and beg him to be patient and promise him you’ll give it all away.

“You have reached the blind alley of the treason you committed when you agreed that you had no right to exist. Once, you believed it was ‘only a compromise’: you conceded it was evil to live for yourself, but moral to live for the sake of your children. Then you conceded that it was selfish to live for your children, but moral to live for your community. Then you conceded that it was selfish to live for your community, but moral to live for your country. Now, you are letting this greatest of countries be devoured by any scum from any corner of the earth, while you concede that it is selfish to live for your country and that your moral duty is to live for the globe. A man who has no right to life, has no right to values and will not keep them.

“At the end of your road of successive betrayals, stripped of weapons, of certainty, of honor, you commit your final act of treason and sign your petition of intellectual bankruptcy: while the muscle-mystics of the People’s States proclaim that they’re the champions of reason and science, you agree and hasten to proclaim that faith is your cardinal principle, that reason is on the side of your destroyers, but yours is the side of faith. To the struggling remnants of rational honesty in the twisted, bewildered minds of your children, you declare that you can offer no rational argument to support the ideas that created this country, that there is no rational justification for freedom, for property, for justice, for rights, that they rest on a mystical insight and can be accepted only on faith, that in reason and logic the enemy is right, but faith is superior to reason. You declare to your children that it is rational to loot, to torture, to enslave, to expropriate, to murder, but that they must resist the temptations of logic and stick to the discipline of remaining irrational-that skyscrapers, factories, radios, airplanes were the products of faith and mystic intuition, while famines, concentration camps, and firing squads are the products of a reasonable manner of existence-that the industrial revolution was the revolt of the men of faith against that era of reason and logic which is known as the Middle Ages. Simultaneously, in the same breath, to the same child, you declare that the looters who rule the People’s States will surpass this country in material production, since they are the representatives of science, but that it’s evil to be concerned with physical wealth and that one must renounce material prosperity-you declare that the looters’ ideal are noble, but they do not mean them, while you do; that your purpose in fighting the looters is only to accomplish their aims, which they cannot accomplish, but you can; and that the way to fight them is to beat them to it and give one’s wealth away. Then you wonder why your children join the People’s thugs or become half-crazed delinquents, you wonder why the looters’ conquests keep creeping closer to your doors-and you blame it on human stupidity, declaring that the masses are impervious to reason.

“You blank out the open, public spectacle of the looters’ fight against the mind, and the fact that their bloodiest horrors are unleashed to punish the crime of thinking. You blank out the fact that most mystics of muscle started out as mystics of spirit, that they keep switching from one to the other, that the men you call materialists and spiritualists are only two halves of the same dissected human, forever seeking completion, but seeking it by swinging from the destruction of the flesh to the destruction of the soul and vice versa-that they keep running from your colleges to the slave pens of Europe to an open collapse into the mystic muck of India, seeking any refuge against reality, any form of escape from the mind.

“You blank it out and cling to your hypocrisy of ‘faith’ in order to blank out the knowledge that the looters have a stranglehold upon you, which consists of your moral code-that the looters are the final and consistent practitioners of the morality you’re half-obeying, half-evading-that they practice it the only way it can be practiced: by turning the earth into a sacrificial furnace-that your morality forbids you to oppose them in the only way they can be opposed: by refusing to become a sacrificial animal and proudly asserting your right to exist-that in order to fight them to the finish and with full rectitude, it is your morality that you have to reject.

“You blank’ it out, because your self-esteem is tied to ‘that mystic ‘unselfishness’ which you’ve never possessed or practiced, but spent so many years pretending to possess that the thought of denouncing it fills you with terror. No value is higher than self-esteem, but you’ve invested it in counterfeit securities-and now your morality has caught you in a trap where you are forced to protect your self-esteem by fighting for the creed of self-destruction. The grim joke is on you: that need of self-esteem, which you’re unable to explain or to define, belongs to my morality, not yours; it’s the objective token of my code, it is my proof within your own soul.

“By a feeling he has not learned to identify, but has derived from his first awareness of existence, from his discovery that he has to make choices, man knows that his desperate need of self-esteem is a matter of life or death. As a being of volitional consciousness, he knows that he must know his own value in order to maintain his own life. He knows that he has to be right; to be wrong in action means danger to his life; to be wrong in person, to be evil, means to be unfit for existence.

“Every act of man’s life has to be willed; the mere act of obtaining or eating his food implies that the person he preserves is worthy of being preserved; every pleasure he seeks to enjoy implies that the person who seeks it is worthy of finding enjoyment. He has no choice about his need of self-esteem, his only choice is the standard by which to gauge it. And he makes his fatal error when he switches this gauge protecting his life into the service of his own destruction, when he chooses a standard contradicting existence and sets his self-esteem against reality.

“Every form of causeless self-doubt, every feeling of inferiority and secret unworthiness is, in fact, man’s hidden dread of his inability to deal with existence. But the greater his terror, the more fiercely he clings to the murderous doctrines that choke him. No man can survive the moment of pronouncing himself irredeemably evil; should he do it, his next moment is insanity or suicide. To escape it-if he’s chosen an irrational Standard-he will fake, evade, blank out; he will cheat himself of reality, of existence, of happiness, of mind; and he will ultimately cheat himself of self-esteem by struggling to preserve its illusion rather than to risk discovering its lack. To fear to face an issue is to believe that the worst is true.

“It is not any crime you have committed that infects your soul with permanent guilt, it is none of your failures, errors or flaws, but theblank-out by which you attempt to evade them-it is not any sort of Original Sin or unknown prenatal deficiency, but the knowledge and fact of your basic default, of suspending your mind, of refusing to think. Fear and guilt are your chronic emotions, they are real and you do deserve them, but they don’t come from the superficial reasons you invent to disguise their cause, not from your ’selfishness,’ weakness or ignorance, but from a real and basic threat to your existence; fear, because you have abandoned your weapon of survival, guilt, because you know you have done it volitionally.

“The self you have betrayed is your mind; self-esteem is reliance on one’s power to think. The ego you seek, that essential ‘you’ which you cannot express or define, is not your emotions or inarticulate dreams, but your intellect, that judge of your supreme tribunal whom you’ve impeached in order to drift at the mercy of any stray shyster you describe as your ‘feeling.’ Then you drag yourself through a self-made night, in a desperate quest for a nameless fire, moved by some fading vision of a dawn you had seen and lost.

“Observe the persistence, in mankind’s mythologies, of the legend about a paradise that men had once possessed, the city of Atlantis or the Garden of Eden or some kingdom of perfection, always behind us. The root of that legend exists, not in the past of the race, but in the past of every man. You still retain a sense-not as firm as a memory, but diffused like the pain of hopeless longing-that somewhere in the starting years of your childhood, before you had learned to submit, to absorb the terror of unreason and to doubt the value of your mind, you had known a radiant state of existence, you had known the independence of a rational consciousness facing an open universe. That is the paradise which you have lost, which you seek-which is yours for the taking.

“Some of you will never know who is John Galt. But those of you who have known a single moment of love for existence and of pride in being its worthy lover, a moment of looking at this earth and letting your glance be its sanction, have known the state of being a man, and I-I am only the man who knew that that state is not to be betrayed. I am the man who knew what made it possible and who chose consistently to practice and to be what you had practiced and been in that one moment.

“That choice is yours to make. That choice-the dedication to one’s highest potential-is made by accepting the fact that the noblest act you have ever performed is the act of your mind in the process of grasping that two and two make four.

“Whoever you are-you who are alone with my words in this moment, with nothing but your honesty to help you understand-the choice is still open to be a human being, but the price is to start from scratch, to stand naked in the face of reality and, reversing a costly historical error, to declare: ‘I am, therefore I’ll think.’

“Accept the irrevocable fact that your life depends upon your mind. Admit that the whole of your struggle, your doubts, your fakes, your evasions, was a desperate quest for escape from the responsibility of a volitional consciousness-a quest for automatic knowledge, for instinctive action, for intuitive certainty-and while you called it a longing for the state of an angel, what you were seeking was the state of an animal. Accept, as your moral ideal, the task of becoming a man.

“Do not say that you’re afraid to trust your mind because you know so little. Are you safer in surrendering to mystics and discarding the little that you know? Live and act within the limit of your knowledge and keep expanding it to the limit of your life. Redeem your mind from the hockshops of authority. Accept the fact that you are not omniscient, but playing a zombie will not give you omniscience-that your mind is fallible, but becoming mindless will not make you infallible-that an error made on your own is safer than ten truths accepted on faith, because the first leaves you the means to correct it, but the second destroys your capacity to distinguish truth from error. In place of your dream of an omniscient automation, accept the fact that any knowledge man acquires is acquired by his own will and effort, and that that is his distinction in the universe, that is his nature, his morality, his glory.

“Discard that unlimited license to evil which consists of claiming that man is imperfect. By what standard do you damn him when you claim it? Accept the fact that in the realm of morality nothing less than perfection will do. But perfection is not to be gauged by mystic commandments to practice the impossible, and your moral stature is not to be gauged by matters not open to your choice. Man has a single basic choice: to think or not, and that is the gauge of his virtue. Moral perfection is an unbreached rationality-not the degree of your intelligence, but the full and relentless use of your mind, not the extent of your knowledge, but the acceptance of reason as an absolute.

“Learn to distinguish the difference between errors of knowledge and breaches of morality. An error of knowledge is not a moral flaw, provided you are willing to correct it; only a mystic would judge human beings by the standard of an impossible, automatic omniscience. But a breach of morality is the conscious choice of an action you know to be evil, or a willful evasion of knowledge, a suspension of sight and of thought. That which you do not know, is not a moral charge against you; but that which you refuse to know, is an account of infamy growing in your soul. Make every allowance for errors of knowledge; do not forgive or accept any breach of morality. Give the benefit of the doubt to those who seek to know; but treat as potential killers those specimens of insolent depravity who make demands upon you, announcing that they have and seek no reasons, proclaiming, as a license, that they ‘just feel it’-or those who reject an irrefutable argument by saying: ‘It’s only logic,’ which means: ‘It’s only reality.’ The only realm opposed to reality is the realm and premise of death.

“Accept the fact that the achievement of your happiness is the only moral purpose of your life, and that happiness-not pain or mindless self-indulgence-is the proof of your moral integrity, since it is the proof and the result of your loyalty to the achievement of your values. Happiness was the responsibility you dreaded, it required the kind of rational discipline you did not value yourself enough to assume-and the anxious staleness of your day is the monument to your evasion of the knowledge that there is no moral substitute for happiness, that there is no more despicable coward than the man who deserted the battle for his joy, fearing to assert his right to existence, lacking the courage and the loyalty to life of a bird or a flower reaching for the sun. Discard the protective rags of that vice which you called a virtue: humility-learn to value yourself, which means: to fight for your happiness-and when you learn that pride is the sum of all virtues, you will learn to live like a man.

“As a basic step of self-esteem, learn to treat as the mark of a cannibal any man’s demand for your help. To demand it is to claim that your life is his property-and loathsome as such claim might be, there’s something still more loathsome: your agreement. Do you ask if it’s ever proper to help another man? No-if he claims it as his right or as a moral duty that you owe him. Yes-if such is your own desire based on your own selfish pleasure in the value of his person and his struggle. Suffering as such is not a value; only man’s fight against suffering, is. If you choose to help a man who suffers, do it only on the ground of his virtues, of his right to recover, of his rational record, or of the fact that he suffers unjustly; then your action is still a trade, and his virtue is the payment for your help. Be to help a man who has no virtues, to help him on the ground of his suffering as such, to accept his faults, his need, as a claim-is to accept the mortgage of a zero on your values. A man who has no virtues is a hater of existence who acts on the premise of death; to help him is to sanction his evil and to support his career of destruction. Be it only a penny you will not miss or a kindly smile he has not earned, a tribute to a zero is treason to life and to all those who struggle to maintain it. It is of such pennies and smiles that the desolation of your world was made.

“Do not say that my morality is too hard for you to practice and that you fear it as you fear the unknown. Whatever living moments you have known, were lived by the values of my code. But you stifled, negated, betrayed it. You kept sacrificing your virtues to your vices, and the best among men to the worst. Look around you: what you have done to society, you have done it first within your soul; one is the image of the other. This dismal wreckage, which is now your world, is the physical form of the treason you committed to your values, to your friends, to your defenders, to your future, to your country, to yourself.

“We-whom you are now calling, but who will not answer any longer-we have lived among you, but you failed to know us, you refused to think and to see what we were. You failed to recognize the motor I invented-and it became, in your world, a pile of dead scrap. You failed to recognize the hero in your soul-and you failed to know me when I passed you in the street. When you cried in despair for the unattainable spirit which you felt had deserted your world, you gave it my name, but what you were calling was your own betrayed self-esteem. You will not recover one without the other.

“When you failed to give recognition to man’s mind and attempted to rule human beings by force-those who submitted had no mind to surrender; those who had, were men who don’t submit. Thus the man of productive genius assumed in your world the disguise of a playboy and became a destroyer of wealth, choosing to annihilate his fortune rather than surrender it to guns. Thus the thinker, the man of reason, assumed in your world the role of a pirate, to defend his values by force against your force, rather than submit to the rule of brutality. Do you hear me, Francisco d’Anconia and Ragnar Danneskjöld, my first friends, my fellow fighters, my fellow outcasts, in whose name and honor I speak?

“It was the three of us who started what I am now completing. It was the three of us who resolved to avenge this country and to release its imprisoned soul. This greatest of countries was built on my morality-on the inviolate supremacy of man’s right to exist-but you dreaded to admit it and live up to it. You stared at an achievement unequaled in history, and looted its effects and blanked out its cause. In the presence of that monument to human morality, which is a factory, a highway or a bridge-you kept damning this country as immoral and its progress as ‘material greed,’ you kept offering apologies for this country’s greatness to the idol of primordial starvation, to decaying Europe’s idol of a leprous, mystic bum.

“This country-the product of reason-could not survive on the morality of sacrifice. It was not built by men who sought self-immolation or by men who sought handouts. It could not stand on the mystic split that divorced man’s soul from his body. It could not live by the mystic doctrine that damned this earth as evil and those who succeeded on earth as depraved. From its start, this country was a threat to the ancient rule of mystics. In the brilliant rocket-explosion of its youth, this country displayed to an incredulous world what greatness was possible to man, what happiness was possible on earth. It was one or the other: America or mystics. The mystics knew it; you didn’t. You let them infect you with the worship of need-and this country became a giant in body with a mooching midget in place of its soul, while its living soul was driven underground to labor and feed you in silence, unnamed, unhonored, negated, its soul and hero: the industrialist. Do you hear me now, Hank Rearden, the greatest of the victims I have avenged?

“Neither he nor the rest of us will return until the road is clear to rebuild this country-until the wreckage of the morality of sacrifice has been wiped out of our way. A country’s political system is based on its code of morality. We will rebuild America’s system on the moral premise which had been its foundation, but which you treated as a guilty underground, in your frantic evasion of the conflict between that premise and your mystic morality: the premise that man is an end in himself, not the means to the ends of others, that man’s life, his freedom, his happiness are his by inalienable right.

“You who’ve lost the concept of a right, you who swing in impotent evasiveness between the claim that rights are a gift of God, a supernatural gift to be taken on faith, or the claim that rights are a gift of society, to be broken at its arbitrary whim-the source of man’s rights is not divine law or congressional law, but the law of identity. A is A-and Man is Man. Rights are conditions of existence required by man’s nature for his proper survival. If man is to live on earth, it is right for him to use his mind, his right to act on his own free judgment, it is right to work for his values and to keep the product of his work. If life on earth is his purpose, he has a right to live as a rational being: nature forbids him the irrational. Any group, any gang, any nation that attempts to negate man’s rights, is wrong, which means: is evil, which means: is anti-life.

“Rights are a moral concept-and morality is a matter of choice. Men are free not to choose man’s survival as the standard of their morals and their laws, but not free to escape from the fact that the alternative is a cannibal society, which exists for a while by devouring its best and collapses like a cancerous body, when the healthy have been eaten by the diseased, when the rational have been consumed by the irrational. Such has been the fate of your societies in history, but you’ve evaded the knowledge of the cause. I am here to state it: the agent of retribution was the law of identity, which you cannot escape. Just as man cannot live by means of the irrational, so two men cannot, or two thousand, or two billion. Just as man can’t succeed by defying reality, so a nation can’t, or a country, or a globe. A is A. The rest is a matter of time, provided by the generosity of victims.

“Just as man can’t exist without his body, so no rights can exist without the right to translate one’s rights into reality-to think, to work and to keep the results-which means: the right of poverty. The modern mystics of muscle who offer you the fraudulent alternative of ‘human rights’ versus ‘property rights,’ as if one could exist without the other, are making a last, grotesque attempt to revive the doctrine of soul versus body. Only a ghost can exist without material property; only a slave can work with no right to the product of his effort. The doctrine that ‘human rights’ are superior to ‘property rights’ simply means that some human beings have the right to make property out of others; since the competent have nothing to gain from the incompetent, it means the right of the incompetent to own their betters and to use them as productive cattle. Whoever regards this as human and right, has no right to the title of ‘human.’

“The source of property rights is the law of causality. All property and all forms of wealth are produced by man’s mind and labor. As you cannot have effects without causes, so you cannot have wealth without its source: without intelligence. You cannot force intelligence to work: those who’re able to think, will not work under compulsion: those who will, won’t produce much more than the price of the whip needed to keep them enslaved. You cannot obtain the products of a mind except on the owner’s terms, by trade and by volitional consent. Any other policy of men toward man’s poverty is the policy of criminals, no matter what their numbers. Criminals are savages who play in short-range and starve when their prey runs out-just as you’re starving today, you who believed that crime could be ‘practical’ if your government decreed that robbery was legal and resistance to robbery illegal.

“The only proper purpose of a government is to protect man’s rights, which means: to protect him from physical violence. A proper government is only a policeman, acting as an agent of man’s self-defense, and, as such, may resort to force only against those who start the use of force. The only proper functions of a government are: the police, to protect you from criminals; the army, to protect you from foreign invaders; and the courts, to protect your property and contracts from breach or fraud by others, to settle disputes by rational rules, according to objective law. But a government that initiates the employment of force against men who had forced no one, the employment of armed compulsion against disarmed victims, is a nightmare infernal machine designed to annihilate morality: such a government reverses its only moral purpose and switches from the role of protector to the role of man’s deadliest enemy, from the role of policeman to the role of a criminal vested with the right to the wielding of violence against victims deprived of the right of self-defense. Such a government substitutes for morality the following rule of social conduct: you may do whatever you please to your neighbor, provided your gang is bigger than his.

“Only a brute, a fool or an evader can agree to exist on such terms or agree to give his fellow men a blank check on his life and his mind, to accept the belief that others have the right to dispose of his person at their whim, that the will of the majority is Omnipotent, that the physical force of muscles and numbers is a substitute for justice, reality and truth. We, the men of the mind, we who are traders, not masters or slaves, do not deal in blank checks or grant them. We do not live or work with any form of the non-objective.

“So long as men, in the era of savagery, had no concept of objective reality and believed that physical nature was ruled by the whim of unknowable demons-no thought, no science, no production were possible. Only when men discovered that nature was a firm, predictable absolute were they able to rely on their knowledge, to choose their course, to plan their future and, slowly, to rise from the cave. Now you have placed modern industry, with its immense complexity of scientific precision, back into the power of unknowable demons-the unpredictable power of the arbitrary whims of hidden, ugly little bureaucrats. A farmer will not invest the effort of one summer if he’s unable to calculate his chances of a harvest. But you expect industrial giants-who plan in terms of decades, invest in terms of generations and undertake ninety-nine-year contracts-to continue to function and produce, not knowing what random caprice in the skull of what random official will descend upon them at what moment to demolish the whole of their effort. Drifters and physical laborers live and plan by the range of a day. The better the mind, the longer the range. A man whose vision extends to a shanty, might continue to build on your quicksands, to grab a fast profit and run. A man who envisions skyscrapers, will not. Nor will he give ten years of unswerving devotion to the task of inventing a new product, when he knows the gangs of entrenched mediocrity are juggling the laws against him, to tie him, restrict him and force him to fail, but should he fight them and struggle and succeed, they will seize his rewards and his invention.

“Look past the range of the moment, you who cry that you fear to compete with men of superior intelligence, that their mind is a threat to your livelihood, that the strong leave no chance to the weak in a market of voluntary trade. What determines the material value of your work? Nothing but the productive effort of your mind-if you lived on a desert island. The less efficient the thinking of your brain, the less your physical labor would bring you-and you could spend your life on a single routine, collecting a precarious harvest or hunting with bow and arrows, unable to think any further. But when you live in a rational society, where men are free to trade, you receive an incalculable bonus: the material value of your work is determined not only by your effort, but by the effort of the best productive minds who exist in the world around you.

“When you work in a modern factory, you are paid, not only for your labor, but for all the productive genius which has made that factory possible: for the work of the industrialist who built it, for the work of the investor who saved the money to risk on the untried and the new, for the work of the engineer who designed the machines of which you are pushing the levers, for the work of the inventor who created the product which you spend your time on making, for the work of the scientist who discovered the laws that went into the making of that product, for the work of the philosopher who taught men how to think and whom your spend your time denouncing.

“The machine, the frozen form of a living intelligence, is the power that expands the potential of your life by raising the productivity of your time. If you worked as a blacksmith in the mystics’ Middle Ages, the whole of your earning capacity would consist of an iron bar produced by your hands in days and days of effort. How many tons of rail do you produce per day if you work for Hank Rearden? Would you dare to claim that the size of your pay cheek was created solely by your physical labor and that those rails were the product of your muscles? The standard of living of that blacksmith is all that your muscles are worth; the rest is a gift from Hank Rearden.

“Every man is free to rise as far as he’s able or willing, but it’s only the degree to which he thinks that determines the degree to which he’ll rise. Physical labor as such can extend no further than the range of the moment. The man who does no more than physical labor, consumes the material value-equivalent of his own contribution to the process of production, and leaves no further value, neither for himself nor others. But the man who produces an idea in any field of rational endeavor-the man who discovers new knowledge-is the permanent benefactor of humanity. Material products can’t be shared, they belong to some ultimate consumer; it Is only the value of an idea that can be shared with unlimited numbers of men, making all sharers richer at no one’s sacrifice or loss, raising the productive capacity of whatever labor they perform. It is the value of his own time that the strong of the intellect transfers to the weak, letting them work on the jobs he discovered, while devoting his time to further discoveries. This is mutual trade to mutual advantage; the interests of the mind are one, no matter what the degree of intelligence, among men who desire to work and don’t seek or expect the unearned.

“In proportion to the mental energy he spent, the man who creates a new invention receives but a small percentage of his value in terms of material payment, no matter what fortune he makes, no matter what millions he earns. But the man who works as a janitor in the factory producing that invention, receives an enormous payment in proportion to the mental effort that his job requires of him. And the same is true of all men between, on all levels of ambition and ability. The man at the top of the intellectual pyramid contributes the most to all those below him, but gets nothing except his material payment, receiving no intellectual bonus from others to add to the value of his time. The man at the bottom who, left to himself, would starve in his hopeless ineptitude, contributes nothing to those above him, but receives the bonus of all of their brains. Such is the nature of the ‘competition’ between the strong and the weak of the intellect. Such is the pattern of ‘exploitation’ for which you have damned the strong.

“Such was the service we had given you and were glad and willing to give. What did we ask in return? Nothing but freedom. We required that you leave us free to function-free to think and to work as we choose-free to take our own risks and to bear our own losses-free to earn our own profits and to make our own fortunes-free to gamble on your rationality, to submit our products to your judgment for the purpose of a voluntary trade, to rely on the objective value of our work and on your mind’s ability to see it-free to count on your intelligence and honesty, and to deal with nothing but your mind. Such was the price we asked, which you chose to reject as too high. You decided to call it unfair that we, who had dragged you out of your hovels and provided you with modern apartments, with radios, movies and cars, should own our palaces and yachts-you decided that you had a right to your wages, but we had no right to our profits, that you did not want us to deal with your mind, but to deal, instead, with your gun. Our answer to that, was: ‘May you be damned!’ Our answer came true. You are.

“You did not care to compete in terms of intelligence-you are now competing in terms of brutality. You did not care to allow rewards to be won by successful production-you are now running a race in which rewards are won by successful plunder. You called it selfish and cruel that men should trade value for value-you have now established an unselfish society where they trade extortion for extortion. Your system is a legal civil war, where men gang up on one another and struggle for possession of the law, which they use as a club over rivals, till another gang wrests it from their clutch and clubs them with it in their turn, all of them clamoring protestations of service to an unnamed public’s unspecified good. You had said that you saw no difference between economic and political power, between the power of money and the power of guns-no difference between reward and punishment, no difference between purchase and plunder, no difference between pleasure and fear, no difference between life and death. You are learning the difference now.

“Some of you might plead the excuse of your ignorance, of a limited mind and a limited range. But the damned and the guiltiest among you are the men who had the capacity to know, yet chose to blank out reality, the men who were willing to steel their intelligence into cynical servitude to force: the contemptible breed of those mystics of science who profess a devotion to some sort of ‘pure knowledge’-the purity consisting of their claim that such knowledge has no practical purpose on this earth-who reserve their logic for inanimate matter, but believe that the subject of dealing with men requires and deserves no rationality, who scorn money and sell their souls in exchange for a laboratory supplied by loot. And since there is no such thing as ‘non-practical knowledge’ or any sort of ‘disinterested’ action, since they scorn the use of their science for the purpose and profit of life, they deliver their science to the service of death, to the only practical purpose it can ever have for looters: to inventing weapons of coercion and destruction. They, the intellects who seek escape from moral values, they are the damned on their earth, theirs is the guilt beyond forgiveness. Do you hear me, Dr. Robert Stadler?

“But it is not to him that I wish to speak. I am speaking to those among you who have retained some sovereign shred of their soul, unsold and unstamped: ‘-to the order of others.’ If, in the chaos of the motives that have made you listen to the radio tonight, there was an honest, rational desire to learn what is wrong with the world, you are the man whom I wished to address. By the rules and terms of my code, one owes a rational statement to those whom it does concern and who’re making an effort to know. Those who’re making an effort to fall to understand me, are not a concern of mine.

“I am speaking to those who desire to live and to recapture the honor of their soul. Now that you know the truth about your world stop supporting your own destroyers. The evil of the world is made possible by nothing but the sanction to give it. Withdraw your sanction. Withdraw your support. Do not try to live on your enemies’ terms or to win at a game where they’re setting the rules. Do not seek the favor of those who enslaved you, do not beg for alms from those who have robbed you, be it subsidies, loans or jobs, do not join their team to recoup what they’ve taken by helping them rob your neighbors. One cannot hope to maintain one’s life by accepting bribes to condone one’s destruction. Do not straggle for profit, success or security at the price of a lien on your right to exist. Such a lien is not to be paid off; the more you pay them, the more they will demand; the greater the values you seek or achieve, the more vulnerably helpless you become. Theirs is a system of white blackmail devised to bleed you, not by means of your sins, but by means of your love for existence.

“Do not attempt to rise on the looters’ terms or to climb a ladder while they’re holding the ropes. Do not allow their hands to touch the only power that keeps them in power: your living ambition. Go on strike-in the manner I did. Use your mind and skill in private, extend your knowledge, develop your ability, but do not share your achievements with others. Do not try to produce a fortune, with a looter riding on your back. Stay on the lowest rung of their ladder, earn no more than your barest survival, do not make an extra penny to support the looters’ state. Since you’re captive, act as a captive, do not help them pretend that you’re free. Be the silent, incorruptible enemy they dread. When they force you, obey-but do not volunteer. Never volunteer a step in their direction, or a wish, or a plea, or a purpose. Do not help a holdup man to claim that he acts as your friend and benefactor. Do not help your jailers to pretend that their jail is your natural state of existence. Do not help them to fake reality. That fake is the only dam holding off their secret terror, the terror of knowing they’re unfit to exist; remove it and let them drown; your sanction is their only life belt.

“If you find a chance to vanish into some wilderness out of their reach, do so, but not to exist as a bandit or to create a gang competing with their racket; build a productive life of your own with those who accept your moral code and are willing to struggle for a human existence. You have no chance to win on the Morality of Death or by the code of faith and force; raise a standard to which the honest will repair: the standard of Life and Reason.

“Act as a rational being and aim at becoming a rallying point for all those who are starved for a voice of integrity-act on your rational values, whether alone in the midst of your enemies, or with a few of your chosen friends, or as the founder of a modest community on the frontier of mankind’s rebirth.

“When the looters’ state collapses, deprived of the best of its slaves, when it falls to a level of impotent chaos, like the mystic-ridden nations of the Orient, and dissolves into starving robber gangs fighting to rob one another-when the advocates of the morality of sacrifice perish with their final ideal-then and on that day we will return.

“We will open the gates of our city to those who deserve to enter, a city of smokestacks, pipe lines, orchards, markets and inviolate homes. We will act as the rallying center for such hidden outposts as you’ll build. With the sign of the dollar as our symbol-the sign of free trade and free minds-we will move to reclaim this country once more from the impotent savages who never discovered its nature, its meaning, its splendor. Those who choose to join us, will join us; those who don’t, will not have the power to stop us; hordes of savages have never been an obstacle to men who carried the banner of the mind.

“Then this country will once more become a sanctuary for a vanishing species: the rational being. The political system we will build is contained in a single moral premise: no man may obtain any values from others by resorting to physical force. Every man will stand or fall, live or die by his rational judgment. If he fails to use it and falls, he will be his only victim. If he fears that his judgment is inadequate, he will not be given a gun to improve it. If he chooses to correct his errors in time, he will have the unobstructed example of his betters, for guidance in learning to think; but an end will be put to the infamy of paying with one life for the errors of another.

“In that world, you’ll be able to rise in the morning with the spirit you have known in your childhood: that spirit of eagerness, adventure and certainty which comes from dealing with a rational universe. No child is afraid of nature; it is your fear of men that will vanish, the fear that has stunted your soul, the fear you acquired in your early encounters with the incomprehensible, the unpredictable, the contradictory, the arbitrary, the hidden, the faked, the irrational in men. You will live in a world of responsible beings, who will be as consistent and reliable as facts; the guarantee of their character will be a system of existence where objective reality is the standard of the judge. Your virtues will be given protection, your vices and weaknesses will not. Every chance will be open to your good, none will be provided for your evil. What you’ll receive from men will not be alms, or pity, or mercy, or forgiveness of sins, but a single value: justice. And when you’ll look at men or at yourself, you will feel, not disgust, suspicion and guilt, but a single constant: respect.

“Such is the future you are capable of winning. It requires a struggle; so does any human value. All life is a purposeful struggle, and your only choice is the choice of a goal. Do you wish to continue the battle of your present or do you wish to fight for my world? Do you wish to continue a struggle that consists of clinging to precarious ledges in a sliding descent to the abyss, a struggle where the hardships you endure are irreversible and the victories you win bring you closer to destruction? Or do you wish to undertake a struggle that consists of rising from ledge to ledge in a steady ascent to the top, a struggle where the hardships are investments in your future, and the victories bring you irreversibly closer to the world of your moral ideal, and should you die without reaching full sunlight, you will die on a level touched by its rays? Such is the choice before you. Let your mind and your love of existence decide.

“The last of my words will be addressed to those heroes who might still be hidden in the world, those who are held prisoner, not by their evasions, but by their virtues and their desperate courage. My brothers in spirit, check on your virtues and on the nature of the enemies you’re serving. Your destroyers hold you by means of your endurance, your generosity, your innocence, your love-the endurance that carries their burdens-the generosity that responds to their cries of despair-the innocence that is unable to conceive of their evil and gives them the benefit of every doubt, refusing to condemn them without understanding and incapable of understanding such motives as theirs-the love, your love of life, which makes you believe that they are men and that they love it, too. But the world of today is the world they wanted; life is the object of their hatred. Leave them to the death they worship. In the name of your magnificent devotion to this earth, leave them, don’t exhaust the greatness of your soul on achieving the triumph of the evil of theirs. Do you hear me … my love?

“In the name of the best within you, do not sacrifice this word to those who are its worst. In the name of the values that keep you alive, do not let your vision of man be distorted by the ugly, the cowardly, the mindless in those who have never achieved his title. Do not lose your knowledge that man’s proper estate is an upright posture, an intransigent mind and a step that travels unlimited roads. Do not let your fire go out, spark by irreplaceable spark, in the hopeless swamps of the approximate, the not-quite, the not-yet, the not-at-all. Do not let the hero in your soul perish, in lonely frustration for the life you deserved, but have never been able to reach. Check your road and the nature of your battle. The world you desired can be won, it exists, it is real, it is possible, it’s yours.

“But to win it requires your total dedication and a total break with the world of your past, with the doctrine that man is a sacrificial animal who exists for the pleasure of others. Fight for the value of your person. Fight for the virtue of your pride. Fight for the essence of that which is man: for his sovereign rational mind. Fight with the radiant certainty and the absolute rectitude of knowing that yours is the Morality of Life and that yours is the battle for any achievement, any value, any grandeur, any goodness, any joy that has ever existed on this earth.

“You will win when you are ready to pronounce the oath I have taken at the start of my battle-and for those who wish to know the day of my return, I shall now repeat it to the hearing of the world:

“I swear-by my life and my love of it-that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine.

I preface this post with some very powerful quotes that set the stage for the argument to follow.  Take the time to read them.

“We are grateful to The Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine & other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promise of discretion for almost 40 years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plans for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years”.  – David Rockerfeller, Bildenberg Conference

“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.” — H.L. Mencken (1918)

“Our job is to give people not what they want, but what we decide they ought to have.” – Richard Salent, Former President CBS News.

“Our contemporaries are constantly excited by two conflicting passions: they want to be led, and they wish to remain free. As they cannot destroy either the one or the other of these contrary propensities, they strive to satisfy them both at once. They devise a sole, tutelary, and all-powerful form of government, but elected by the people. They combine the principle of centralization and that of popular sovereignty; this gives them a respite: they console themselves for being in tutelage by the reflection that they have chosen their own guardians. Every man allows himself to be put in leading-strings, because he sees that it is not a person or a class of persons, but the people at large who hold the end of his chain”.–Alexis de Tocqueville

The CFR embraces members of both major American political parties. It is not a partisan organization. Voters are led to believe that, by choosing between the Democrat and Republican parties, they have a choice. They think they are participating in their own political destiny, but that is an illusion. To a collectivist like Professor Quigley, it is a necessary illusion to prevent the voters from meddling into the important affairs of state. If you have ever wondered why the two American parties appear so different at election timebut so similar afterward, listen carefully to Quigley’s approving overview of American politics:

The National parties and their presidential candidates, with the Eastern Establishment assiduously fostering the process behind the scenes, moved closer together and nearly met in the center with almost identical candidates and platforms, although the process was concealed as much as possible, by the revival of obsolescent or meaningless war cries and slogans (often going back to the Civil War). … The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to the doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can “throw the rascals out” at any election without leading to any profound or extreme shifts in policy. … Either party in office becomes in time corrupt, tired, unenterprising, and vigorless. Then it should be possible to replace it, every four years if necessary, by the other party, which will be none of these things but will still pursue, with new vigor, approximately the same basic policies. Quigley, Tragedy, pp. 1247–1248.

What are those basic policies? They are anything that advances the network’s long range goal. Quigley says that candidates and parties can and should differ on many things so long as they mutually advance world government based on the model of collectivism. While campaigning, they should appear to be fierce opponents; but when the elections are over, they must work in harmony for the main objective. Everything else is showmanship. Let us examine a few examples.

In the Carter Administration, the U.S. electorate was overwhelmingly opposed togiving away the Panama Canal, yet the leadership of both parties voted to do so, led on both sides of the isle by members of the CFR.

Republicans call for war in the Middle East and advocate that we give more power to the UN. Democrats call for peace and advocate that we give more power to the UN. The voters don’t want that, but it is a goal of CFR. Neither party objects to the fact that a UN resolution was the legal basis for war rather than the U.S. Constitution.

Republicans promote legislation to restrict personal rights in the name of antiterrorism. Democrats give speeches of concern and then vote for those laws. The voters don’t want that, but it is the goal of the CFR. The legislation was written by members of the CFR even before 9/11.

Republicans give speeches about the danger of illegal immigration. Democrats give speeches about compassion to immigrants. Both parties unite in merging the U.S. with Mexico and Canada so that national borders soon will be meaningless. The voters don’t want that, but it is the goal of CFR.

Republican leaders steal elections with rigged voting machines. Democrat leaders accept their fate with no serious challenge. That’s because rigging elections by preprogrammed voting machines is merely the latest and perhaps ultimate implementation of the Quigley Formula. It’s the end of the line for honest elections and representative government.

The leaders of both political parties are like TV wrestlers. They put on a great show in the ring. They slam each other onto the mat. They jump on each other, pummel each other with apparently bone-breaking blows. They throw each other out of the ring; but it is not a real contest. They have agreed in advance who is going to win, and they are content to wait their turn to be the winner next time. They are professionals, and it’s good for business.

Likewise, politicians today are professionals. They also know what is good for their business, and they play the game well. Meanwhile, voters are like tennis balls, smashed back and forth across the net of politics. The tennis players win half the time, but the tennis ball never wins. And so the game goes on, as our nation and freedom fade into history.

CONTROLLED OPPOSITION

This game would not be convincing without the media pied pipers who serve the two major parties. These celebrity-status commentators and organizations offer themselves as unbiased observers with no political ambitions of their own; but, in reality, they are highly partisan propagandists. No matter what grave issue is up for discussion, their analysis will skew it as a reason to vote Republican or Democrat, depending on their bias. Here are a few examples.

Talk-show host, Rush Limbaugh, does a great job of exposing and ridiculing corrupt Democrats and their policies, but he never met a Republican he didn’t like. He may gently criticize Republicans once in a while, but never with the vitriol heaped upon Democrats. He may express disdain now and then for the United Nations but only because it is not strong enough or because it fails to take what Republicans consider to be the correct action. He never questions its power or legitimacy – and, of course, he never mentions the CFR.

Film producer, Michael Moore, does a great job of exposing and ridiculing corrupt Republicans and their policies, but he never met a Democrat he didn’t like. He’s all for the United Nations and never mentions the CFR.

The organization called Accuracy in Media does a great job of exposing deceit and treachery within the ranks of Democrats, but it finds little to criticize in the Republican camp and never mentions the CFR.

The organization called Move-On does a great job of exposing deceit and treachery within the ranks of Republicans, but it finds little to criticize in the Democrat camp and never mentions the CFR.

The Internet news and commentary service, Human Events Online, calls itself a “conservative” weekly; but it is an obedient supporter of the Republican Party even when it’s policies are the opposite of traditional conservatism. It never mentions the CFR.

The editors of the Internet news service, Unknown News, say they are disgusted with both parties because they do not offer serious solutions to the problems they mutually have created. Hooray! But, in their commentary, they routinely identify corrupt Republicans by party label (implying they are scumbags because they are Republicans). They usually omit the party label when reporting on corrupt Democrats. If they do include it, they often accompany it by saying: “Even the Democrats” were involved with this or failed to oppose that. The clear message is that they expect more from the Democrats. Unknown News reports the deeds of such corrupt world leaders, as Putin, Castro, and Chavez in sympathetic or admiring tones. We are never reminded of their failures or crimes. Domestic leaders who are Marxist/Leninists also receive favorable coverage, which reveals that the affinity of its editors is with Leninism. Collectivism is their solution-of-choice for every problem. They are disgusted with both political parties, not because they have led us deeper into collectivism, but because they are not aligned with Leninism. The Democrats are more so,in the sense that most U.S. based Leninists are within the Democrat Party and have a strong 17 voice there, which explains the more gentle treatment the Democrats receive from UnknownNews. It never mentions the CFR.

THE POLITICS OF PLUNDER, STUPIDITY, AND HATRED

The result of this two-party charade is that Americans – and those in most other countries in the Western World – are the victims of a great deception. Voters have been

fooled into thinking they are participating in their own political destiny when, in reality, they are being herded into a high-tech feudalism entirely without their consent and, to a large degree, even without their knowledge. This is accomplished by the mirage of a meaningful choice at election time when, in fact, the major parties and their candidates are merely two branches of the same tree of collectivism. Voters today are not attracted to candidates because of their political principles. They have none. Political principles are never allowed as a topic of debate, anyway. Instead, voters make choices on the basis of candidates’ good looks, their smiles, how clever they are in televised debates, their perceived sincerity, and especially how many “benefits” they promise to give to some citizens that are paid from taxes from other citizens. Legalized plunder is a powerful motivator, and it is used with precision by both major parties.

Many voters have come to regard elections as magnificent games in which only the cleverest contestants are entitled to win. They become fascinated by the strategies and deployment of resource, and techniques for evading tough issues, and cleverness of TV spots, and ability to appeal to large voting blocs. They don’t really care who wins as much as they want to pick the winner. To them, it’s like betting in a football pool. They may favor one team over another, but they will place their bet on the team they think stands the best chance of winning, even if it is not their favorite. Winning is everything. That is how they cast their votes. They may prefer a certain candidate, but they will not vote for him if they think someone else will win. How many times have we heard: “I like Bill Smith but he can’t win. So I’m voting for Harry Stone.” All the media has to do is convince people that Bill Smith can’t win, and that will influence enough people to withdraw their vote and make the prediction a self-fulfilling prophecy. The primary purpose of a vote is, not to choose a winner, but to express a choice. It is to create a public record of how many people support the policies and principles of a particular candidate so that, even if he does not win, the winner and the community will be aware of how much support the losing candidate has. It is the ultimate public-opinion poll. We do not want a winner-take-all type of system where those who are considered to have the best chance of winning receive an overwhelming but misleading vote of support. A tyrant who receives 51% of the vote will be more restrained than one who has 80%. The good man who receives 49% of the vote, even though not a winner, becomes a rallying point for those of like mind. He becomes a much more serious contender in the next election than if he receives only 20% of the vote.

There is no point in voting for a candidate unless it is a true reflection of our choice. Representative government is serious business, and treating it as a football pool is succumbing to the politics of stupidity.

There is a third scenario that is even worse. Voters may vote for Harry Stone, not because they think he has a better chance than Bill Smith but because they think he is the lesser of two evils. They vote, not for someone but against someone. It’s not that they like candidate A but they hate candidate B. This is exactly as prescribed by the Quigley Formula. Quigley said that a controlled two-party system will allow people to “throw the 18 rascals out” and replace them with a fresh team with new vigor so the government can continue the bi-partisan drive toward global collectivism with the support of the electorate –until the next cycle when it may be advantageous to swing back again to the previous party. If people wonder why we have evil in government, it’s because they voted for it. The lesser of two evils is still evil. This is the politics of hatred, and it is a highly effective weapon against those who are not aware of the tactic – which is to say, most voters. Voting for a candidate because we hate the other one, and thinking that we cannot go outside the two-party system because a third-party candidate cannot win, is a trap.

Gaia’s Gurus

In my previous article, the First Global Revolution, I outlined how the very influential members of the ‘Club of Rome’ have decided that the Earth is facing an “imminent ecological collapse” and drastic measures must be taken immediately to save Gaia from the destructive beast of capitalism. They claimed that a new enemy was required in order to unite humanity, “one either real or invented for the purpose“, and that “the threat of global warming” is the ideal crisis. In this article I will take a close look at these CoR members, and some of their close affiliates, and let them describe, in their own words, exactly what their world view is. One thing that immediately struck me when researching these men was how often they refer to the Earth as ‘Gaia’, and speak of ‘her’ as a real living sentient earth-spirit. They even call themselves Gaians.

From a Gaian activist’s perspective the theory of Global Warming presents a dream scenario. It strikes at the very heart of ‘Gaias greatest threat’ – capitalism and modern industrial society. According to them without fossil fuels the world will be transformed into the Gaian’s ecotopian vision of small sustainable human settlements, surrounded by protected wild-lands, and governed by some sort of United Earth Council. Global Warming provides a clarion call to which the ‘environmentally aware’ masses can rally. Skeptics are now commonly labelled as climate change-deniers, insinuating that they should be treated with the same contempt that holocaust-deniers deserve.

While those who embrace Gaia-worship may represent a small minority of the Green Movement they are often the most driven, active and influential members. I have been astounded to find that many of the most vocal politicians and scientists currently raising alarms about Global Warming, are also actively involved in the Gaia Cult and Deep Ecology. I had assumed that professional politicians and scientists would give little credence to the extreme views of these neopagan philosophies but, as I will demonstrate shortly, many of them actively and vocally espouse them.

This begs the question, is the real threat of Global Warming being used by Gaians to further their stated agenda of global transformation in which ‘nature is sacred’, or more deviously, has the theory of man-made Global Warming been fabricated as a tool to implement their earth-worship agenda? Based on my many hours of research I have concluded that the second scenario is the most likely. Once you had read enough eco-religious texts it becomes easy to spot Gaian terms and references in the speeches and statements of many prominent Global Warming activists. I am continually amazed at the language that these devout Gaians use to describe themselves and their ‘mission’. And remember these are not the members of some fringe green New Age cult. These are people in positions of significant power and leadership. So lets take a close look at these leaders of the Global Green Agenda:

Dr Robert Muller spent 53 years working within the United Nations and Assistant Secretary-General for more than 12 years (#2 in charge). He is the Founder and Chancellor of the United Nations University of Peace. Here is how he describes himself (remember this is not some fruitcake standing on a streetcorner, this guy was responsible for formulating many UN policies):

A divine motivator … the wise man of the UN … the shaman of the UN … the man through whom God speaks … the spokesman of Christ … a magic being …
link

Robert Muller, a Cosmic Being, a Man of Peace, whose mastery of compassion created these exhortations. At rare intervals in the evolution of the planet Cosmos flares its magic wand and graces us with a Master of Compassion such as Robert Muller.”
link

Now this ‘magic being‘ was a key architect behind many of the UN’s most important environmental policies and plans. If you read Agenda 21 and the Earth Charter you will be shocked. Dr Muller founded the UN’s University of Peace on a mountain in Costa Rica. Why did he choose this location? Because of this ancient prophecy:

The Prophecy of Rasur – One day, a long time ago, in the village of Quisar, all the children suddenly disappeared underground. The parents could not understand what was happening and became extremely worried. Faintly rising up from the earth below, they heard laughter and singing and knew that their children were safe. The children began to move and the parents followed their voices until they were stopped by a strong magnetic force at the base of Mt. Rasur. The Earth abruptly opened up and the children as well as a being of light, Rasur (the god of the indigenous children), appeared to the surprised parents. Rasur then spoke to the children, never once looking at the parents, and said,

“Dear children, the Great Spirit is in every animal, in every bird, butterfly, flower, insect, leaf and grass you see. The Great Spirit is also in you, the Creator’s children. Please take care of the wonderful nature created by God and some day, from this mountain, you will see the birth of a civilization of peace spread to the entire world.
link

Hindus call our earth Brahma, or God, for they rightly see no difference between our earth and the divine. This ancient simple truth is slowly dawning again upon humanity, as we are about to enter our cosmic age and become what we were always meant to be: the planet of god.” – Robert Muller, Chancellor of the UN University for Peace

What an incredible planet in the universe this will be when we will be one human family living in justice, peace, love and harmony with ourdivine Earth, with each other and with the heavens.” – Robert Muller, former UN Assistant Secretary General

So, Dr Muller, who was the right-hand man to three consecutive UN Secretary Generals, and was responsible for formulating many UN policies and programmes clearly believes that the Earth is Divine. On one of his websites he describes conversations between himself and God, and between himself and the Earth (halfway down the page). He has a number of websites that make very interesting reading and clearly demonstrate the link between Gaia, Global Warming and Global Governance.

www.goodmorning-world.blogspot.com
www.robertmulller.org
www.goodmorningworld.org
www.centerforlivingethics.org
www.paradiseearth.us

Those websites provide enough information for a year of study, and I strongly urge the reader to have a look at them. But it’s time to move on to our next CoR Gaian:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Maurice Strong, founder and Secretary General of the United Nations Environment Programme and Senior Advisor to Kofi Annan. Founder of the Earth Council and the Earth Charter Initiative, and former President of the United Nations University of Peace. You will find many references to Maurice Strong on this site. He, more than anyone else, has been the architect of the Global Green Agenda. Strong is a devout Baha’i and from his lofty positions within the UN has permeated the organisation with Gaian theology.

He is the author of most of the key UN environmental policies and plans including Agenda 21, the Earth Charter, the Kyoto Protocol and the UN report on Global Governance. While he chaired the Rio Earth Summit, outside his wife Hanne and 300 followers called the Wisdom-Keepers, continuously beat drums, chanted prayers to Gaia, and trended scared flames in order to “establish and hold the energy field” for the duration of the summit. You can view actual footage of these ceremonies on YouTube. He founded the Manitou Institue where various Hindu, Bhuddist, and New Age groups perform rituals to heal Gaia. The Institutes Mission is “to perpetuate the ancient tradition of peoples of many tribes journeying here for a sacred connection to the Earth.” Very Gaian!!

The Strongs have located their spiritual centre in the Colorado mountains because “The Strongs learned that since antiquity indigenous peoples had revered this pristine wilderness as a place for conducting their vision quests and receiving shamanic trainings. It is prophesied that the world’s religious traditions would gather here and help move the world toward globally conscious co-existence and co-creation.”

It is the responsibility of each human being today to choose between the force of darkness and the force of light. We must therefore transform our attitudes, and adopt a renewed respect for the superior laws of DIVINE NATURE. – Maurice Strong

In 1991 Strong wrote the introduction to a book published by the Trilateral Commission, called Beyond Interdependence: The Meshing of the World’s Economy and the Earth’s Ecology, by Jim MacNeil. (David Rockefeller wrote the foreword). Strong said this: “This interlocking is the new reality of the century, with profound implications for the shape of our institutions of governance, national and international. By the year2012, these changes must be fully integrated into our economic and political life.

He also recently authored a book called ‘Where on Earth are We Going? in which he outlines a doomsday scenario of what will soon happen to Gaia unless there is “an immediate and total global transformation.” His predictions make Al Gore seem like an optimist. He claims that humanity will not survive the next 30 years on its current course.

Strong has served, or is currently on the Board of Directors of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN); the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF); and the World Resources Institute (WRI); the three international NGOs that have developed and advanced the global agenda since the early 1970s. Maurice Strong, alongside Al Gore, is perhaps the most well known, and certainly the most influential, CoR Gaian. He is still deeply involved in the modern green movement and has founded a number of organisations including the Earth Council Alliance.

recommended reading:
At the United Nations, the Curious Career of Maurice Strong – http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,250789,00.html
Maurice Strong Biography – http://www.nationalcenter.org/DossierStrong.html

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

James Lovelock, guru of the Gaia Hypothesis and father of the modern green movement. There is no need to establish Dr Lovelock’s Gaian credentials; he conceived the whole thing after all. He has been one of the most vocal and extreme prophets of the coming climate apocalypse. According to him “By the end of this century the human population will be reduced to a few breeding pairs subsisting near the North Pole.” Interestingly the good doctor has saved the world once before. In 1975 Sir James dramatically discovered that CFC’s were destroying the ozone layer which would shortly lead to our imminent demise. No doubt controlling and eliminating CFC’s was a test case for the big prize, controlling and eliminating fossil fuels. His most recent publication is entitled Homage to Gaia.

This new interrelationship of Gaia with man is by no means fully established; we are not yet a truly collective species, corralled and tamed as an integral part of the biosphere, as we are as individual creatures. It may be that the destiny of mankind is to become tamed, so that the fierce, destructive, and greedy forces of tribalism and nationalism are fused into a compulsive urge to belong to the commonwealth of all creatures which constitutes Gaia.” – James Lovelock, Gaia: A New Look at Life

What if Mary is another name for Gaia? Then her capacity for virgin birth is no miracle . . . it is a role of Gaia since life began . . . She is of this Universe and, conceivably, a part of God. On Earth, she is the source of life everlasting and is alive now; she gave birth to humankind and we are part of her.” – Sir James Lovelock, Ages of Gaia

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Al Gore, ‘inventor of the internet and Global Warming‘ has become the public face of the crusade to unite the world in the fight against global warming. His devout Gaian views are scattered liberally through the various books he has written the environment and human spirituality. Al has formed an Alliance for Climate Protection, using the funds from Live Earth, to push forward his ‘call to action.’ He recently announced a 300 million dollar advertising campaign to raise public awareness and recruit an “army of ten million climate activists.”

In his book Earth in the Balance, Gore devotes no less than three chapters to the ‘Earth Goddess.’ He states that “in prehistoric Europe and much of the world was based on the worship of a single earth goddess, who was assumed to be the fount of all life and who radiated harmony among all living things. Much of the evidence for the existence of this primitive religion comes from the many thousands of artifacts uncovered in ceremonial sites. These sites are so widespread that they seem to confirm the notion that a goddess religion was ubiquitous through much of the world until the antecedents of today’s religions, most of which still have a distinctly masculine orientation…swept out of India and the Near East, almost obliterating belief in the goddess. The last vestige of organized goddess worship was eliminated by Christianity as late as the fifteenth century.” – Earth in the Balance, page 260

The fate of mankind, as well as of religion, depends upon the emergence of a new faith in the future.’ Armed with such a faith, we might find it possible to resanctify the Earth.” – Earth in the Balance

This we know: the Earth does not belong to man, man belongs to the Earth. All things are connected like the blood that unites us all.” Earth in the Balance, page 259.

On the back cover of Earth in the Balance the well-known New Ager M. Scott Peck states: “Earth in Balance is a brilliantly written, prophetic, even holy book, clearly pointing the way we need to change to assure the survival of our children. I pray it will have the dramatic impact it deserves – and must have for our collective salvation.”

In the United States the only operating carbon emissions trading market is the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX). Coincidentally, or not, Al Gore’s hedge fund, Generation Investment Management, is the largest shareholder in CCX. Now that’s what I call a conflict of interest! The most vocal Global Warming alarmist is the largest shareholder in the USA’s only operating ‘carbon market.’ On the board of CCX we find our old friend Maurice Strong.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Mikhail Gorbachev, formerly the President of the Soviet Union and now the founder and chairman of Green Cross International, and the Gorbachev Foundation. Attendees at his 1996 State of the World Forum included New Age gurus Shirley MacLaine, Dennis Weaver, John Denver, John Naisbitt, Carl Sagan, Ted Turner and Jane Fonda, Barbara Marx Hubbard, Maurice Strong, Robert Muller, Dr. Deepak Chopra, and Matthew Fox.

Gorbachev presided over the sudden collapse of the Soviet empire. Perhaps he was removing one of the major obstacles facing the Global Green Agenda. Since then he has been intimately involved in politics of the environmental movement and is considered to be one of its greatest champions. Gorbachev, in association with Maurice Strong, was responsible for the production of the Earth Charter.

Nature is my god. To me, nature is sacred; trees are my temples and forests are my cathedrals.” – Mikhail Gorbachev, 1990

We need a new paradigm of development in which the environment will be a priority… World civilization as we know it will soon end… We have very little time and we must act… If we can address the environment problem, we have hope… but it will have to be done within a new system, a new paradigm… We have to change our mindset – the way humankind views the world.” – Mikhail Gorbachev, State of the World Forum, 1996

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Sir Crispin Tickell, is considered to one of Britain’s most influential diplomats. He was the British Ambassador to Mexico (1981-1983), Permanent Secretary of the Official Development Assistance (1984-1987), British Ambassador to the United Nations and Permanent Representative on the UN Security Council (1987-1990). He chaired the British Government’s 1994 Panel on Sustainable Development. Tickell has been one of the most outspoken Global Warming alarmists even though, like Al Gore, he has no scientific training. His devout Gaian views are extremely obvious with just a cursory glance at his website http://www.crispintickell.com/

Sir Crispin has been or still is the chairman of: the Advisory Committee of the Darwin Initiative for Survival of the Species, the UK Marine Biologists Association, the International Institute for Environment and Development, Earth Watch Europe, The Climate Institute of Washington, DC; and he was or is the president of: the Royal Geographical Society, the National Society for Clean Air, the Gaia Foundation, and the Gaia Society for Research and Education in Earth System Science. This Gaia Society is Sir Crispin’s personal contribution to the Earth Goddess, as it is dedicated to creating a cult around the ideas and personages of eco-spiritualists James Lovelock and Lynn Margulis.

Gaia has no particular tenderness for humans. We are no more than a small, albeit immodest, part of her.” – Sir Crispin Tickell

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, co-founder, former President and current Patron of the World Wildlife Fund for Nature (WWF). The Prince has been deeply involved in the green movement since its inception. In 1971 he founded an organisation called ‘The 1001 Club: A Nature Trust‘ to fund the activities of the WWF. This secretive Club contains quite a few Club of Rome members. The Prince appears to adhere strongly to theDeep Ecology philosophy that considers humans to be nothing more than a feral pest species that must be strictly controlled.

In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, in order to contribute something to solve overpopulation.“ – Prince Philip, in his foreword to ‘If I Were an Animal’

It is now apparent that the ecological pragmatism of the so-called pagan religions, such as that of the American Indians, the Polynesians, and the Australian Aborigines, was a great deal more realistic in terms of conservation ethics than the more intellectual monotheistic philosophies of the revealed religions.“ – Caring for Creation, conference of the North American Conference on Religion and Ecology

I don’t claim to have any special interest in natural history, but as a boy I was made aware of the annual fluctuations in the number of game animals and the need to adjust the cull to the size of the surplus population.“ – Preface to Down to Earth by HRH Prince Philip

We talk about over- and underdeveloped countries; I think a more exact division might be between underdeveloped and overpopulated. The more people there are, the more industry and more waste and the more sewage there is, and therefore the more pollution.“ – address to Edinburgh University Union

If the world pollution situation is not critical at the moment, it is as certain as anything can be that the situation will become increasingly intolerable within a very short time. The situation can be controlled, and even reversed; but it demands cooperation on a scale and intensity beyond anything achieved so far.“ – The Fairfield Osborne Lecture by HRH Prince Philip

Human population growth is probably the single most serious long-term threat to survival. We’re in for a major disaster if it isn’t curbed–not just for the natural world, but for the human world. The more people there are, the more resources they’ll consume, the more pollution they’ll create.“ – interview with HRH Prince Philip

The object of the WWF is to `conserve’ the system as a whole; not to prevent the killing of individual animals. Those who are concerned about their conservation of nature accept that all species are prey to some other species. They accept that most species produce a surplus that is capable of being culled without in any way threatening the survival of the species as a whole.” – The Chancellor’s Lecture, Salford University

There is even a tribe in Vanuatu who consider Prince Philip to be a living god. When told about this the Prince remarked that it was a splendid idea and sent the tribe several portraits they could worship, and has since visited them. Very strange!!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Steven Schneider, Stanford Professor of Biology and Global Change. Professor Schneider was among the earliest and most vocal proponents of man-made global warming. He is most famous for stating that climatologists should only present the most dramatic and frightening scenarios and find their own balance between truth and lies. He has been a lead author of many IPCC reports, and was the editor of ” Scientists on Gaia” in which he states “the Gaia Hypothesis has now become established in mainstream science.” In 1988 also organised the first international conference to discuss “Gaia and Science“.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Sir Richard Branson, multibillionaire and founder of the Virgin group of companies. Sir Richard has certainly jumped on board the Global Warming bandwagon in a big way. According to Branson during a brief discussion over breakfast with Al Gore, “my views on global warming were changed 180 degrees.” That Al guy sure must be persuasive! Branson has since pledged to donate three billion dollars (!!) to “fund the fight against climate change.” Branson has also launched his ‘Climate Challenge’ which offers a prize of $25 million to anyone who can remove carbon dioxide fro the atmosphere. The panel of judges for this challenge are Al Gore, James Lovelock, Sir Crispin Tickell, Tim Flannery and James Hansen.

It will have to be a mix of the best solutions from all these areas that will win the battle to keep CO2 levels below those at which Gaia will strike back at some stage, and kill the problem – in this case us .” – Richard Branson interview

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Dr Tim Flannery, Evolutionary Biologist and very well known environmental activist. He is the Australian version of Jane Goodall. Although Dr Flannery has no training in anything remotely related to climate science he is one of the worlds most vocal alarmists. He travels continuously around world giving lectures on ‘the Climate Catastrophe’ and often refers to Gaia as a sentient super-organism. His website ishttp://www.groveatlantic.com/timflannery.html

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Ted Turner, multibillionaire and founder of CNN. Turner is deeply involved in the Global Green Agenda. He donated more than a billion dollars to the UN which was specifically tagged to fund the IPCC. Turner personally conceived and produced ‘Captain Planet’ an edu-tainment cartoon designed to brainwash our children.

Gaia, the spirit of Earth, awakens from a century long sleep to find the Earth in peril. She summons five teenagers, the Planeteers, from around the globe, and gives each of them a ring which controls an element of nature – Earth, Fire, Wind, Water – and a special power, Heart, which allows them to use their new powers wisely and compassionately.” – http://www.turner.com/planet/mythology/index.html

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I could go on forever, listing literally dozens of other Club of Rome members who refer to the Earth as a sentient divine being called Gaia and are also very actively involved in the Climate Campaign. The Cult of Gaia and Global Warming are intimately entwined. In my next article, the Green Web, I will describe the vast network of organisations these men have set up to push through their nefarious agenda.

The Spiritual United Nations

As discussed in various articles on this website the ‘green philosophy’ that is rapidly permeating our society has been fostered since its inception by the Club of Rome and its affiliated organisations. Members of the CoR triad include Al Gore, Javier Solana, Mikhail Gorbachev, David Rockefeller, Kofi Annan, Bill Clinton, Maurice Strong, Robert Muller, Bill Gates, Jimmy Carter and many other influential leaders. In their various reports the CoR clearly outline their ultimate goal to “transform humanity into a sustainable global interdependent society, based on respect and reverence for the Earth.” To briefly recap their stated agenda in their own words:

Man possesses, for a small moment in his history, the most powerful combination of knowledge, tools, and resources the world has ever known. He has all that is physically necessary to create a totally new form of human society – one that would be built to last for generations.” – The Limits to Growth, a report by The Club of Rome

Now is the time to draw up a master plan for organic sustainable growth and world development based on global allocation of all finite resources and a new global economic system. Ten or twenty years from today it will probably be too late.” – Mankind at the Turning Point, a report by The Club of Rome

This proposed new global system is highly interdependent as, in the same manner that the human body assigns different tasks to its various organs, each region is assigned specialized and specific tasks, and is each is dependent on the others for their common survival…The resultant ideal sustainable population is hence more than 500 million but less than one billion.” – Goals for Mankind, a report by The Club of Rome

In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself. Democracy is not a panacea. It cannot organize everything and it is unaware of its own limits. These facts must be faced squarely. Sacrilegious though this may sound, democracy is no longer well suited for the tasks ahead.” – The First Global Revolution, a report by The Club of Rome

Two of the most influential members of the Club of Rome, Maurice Strong and Robert Muller, have both worked for the United Nations since its inception and risen to the very top of its bureaucracy. Strong was the first Secretary-General of the UN Environment Programme, Chief Policy Advisor to Kofi Annan, Secretary General of the Rio Earth Summit, co-author of the Earth Charter and co-author of the Kyoto Protocol. Muller was the co-founder of UNESCO, the Director of the Budget overseeing all the UN’s 32 programmes, the Founder and Chancellor UN University for Peace, and Assistant Secretary-General of the UN for 12 years. Detailed biographies can be read in my article on Gaia’s Gurus.

During my research into these two men it has become clear that they have permeated the UN with their New Age philosophies based on reverence for the Earth as a divine sentient being. To accomplish this they have worked closely with various New Age organisations that are officially accredited to the United Nations:

The Lucis Trust

This organisation was originally founded in the 1920s by the renowned occultist Alice Bailey under the name of the Lucifer Publishing Company. The Trust is recognised by the United Nations as a Non-Governmental Organisation (NGO) and is represented at regular briefing sessions at the UN. The Lucis Trust is also a member of the UN Economic and Social Council. Interestingly Robert Muller served as the Secretary of this Councilfor many years. Until recently the Lucis Trust was located at 666 United Nations Plaza and lists its official sponsors as the UN, Greenpeace and Amnesty International.

Alice Bailey claimed to be able to channel a spirit guide called ‘the Tibetan Master Djwhal Khul.’ Robert Muller was a disciple of Bailey and in his World Core Curriculum it is explicitly stated that “the underlying philosophy upon which the Robert Muller School is based will be found in the teaching set forth in the books of Alice Bailey by the Tibetan teacher Djwhal Khul.” Bailey taught that the ‘World Spiritual Teacher’ would soon appear and lead the world into the Age of Aquarius and it was the task of her disciples to “prepare the way for His imminent appearance.”

Today there is an increasing expectancy regarding the return of the “World Teacher”, the Coming One who will return to lead humanity into a new age and into a heightened consciousness. In fact, some claim that the Christ has already reappeared in physical form and has been “sighted” in various parts of the world. proclaimed”, either by Himself or by any other individual or group.”

Bailey claimed that this reappearance required intense meditation and the reciting of the Great Invocation. Former UN Sec-Gen Dag Hammarskjold was also a follower of Bailey and he was responsible for the construction of the Meditation Room within the UN building.Meditation meetings have been held regularly within this room for decades and they open with a recital of Bailey’s Great Invocation:

From the point of Light within the Mind of God
Let light stream forth into human minds.
Let Light descend on Earth.

From the point of Love within the Heart of God
Let love stream forth into human hearts.
May the Coming One return to Earth.

From the centre where the Will of God is known
Let purpose guide all little human wills –
The purpose which the Masters know and serve.

From the centre which we call the human race
Let the Plan of Love and Light work out
And may it seal the door where evil dwells.
Let Light and Love and Power restore the Plan on Earth. – link

Interestingly Robert Muller’s EarthPax site refers to him as an Ascended Master and has a copy of the Great Invocation prominently displayed. Remember this guy was second in charge of the UN for decades and founded many of its most important institutions. Even more interestingly many of the organisations founded by Club of Rome members (see here) are in charge of these meditation meetings within the UN!

Each year “the United Nations calls upon individual people of goodwill and groups to observe a Global Vigil of Meditation and Prayer. This year’s Vigil, held on September 21st, “aims to have individuals or groups commit themselves to spend specific 15 minute periods in prayer or meditation for a culture of peace and goodwill. Each 15 minute period begins and ends with a sounding of the Great Invocation.”

The Aquarian Age Community

The AAC was founded by the Lucis Trust and describes its mission as “preparing the way for the imminent appearance of the World Spiritual Teacher.” They are an official consultative NGO in association with the United Nations’ Department of Public Information and their website is sponsored by the UN. On their website they state:

We have an informal network at the UN, a humanity underground. It consists of those who are committed, aware, and striving to bring the New World to birth. It consists of people in high places and in low. The patient Secretary who has been 30 years with the UN,but lives with the vision and the spirit; of the professionals, and undersecretaries and heads of departments who are acting out the imperatives that their own inner vision gives them.

Some few are conscious of the sources of their inspiration; most are not. They are the Karma Yogis of our time – those whose path of spirituality is to achieve through doing – to grow through serving. They are found not only in the secretariat but also in the delegations to the UN, among the diplomats and their staffs, and also among folks like us, representatives of non-governmental organizations around the UN.” – link

No doubt the ‘patient Secretary’ refers to Robert Muller who served as Assistant Sec-Gen of the UN for decades, or perhaps Maurice Strong who also served in this position. The AAC has a startling website that clearly outlines their goals and influence within the UN. Even a brief perusal leaves little doubt of their true agenda. Articles on their site include:

THE SPIRITUAL IMPULSE BEHIND THE UNITED NATIONS

PLANETARY INITIATION AND THE WORK OF THE UNITED NATIONS

THE NEW WORLD ORDER AND THE WORK OF THE UNITED NATIONS

SPIRITUALITY AT THE UNITED NATIONS

PREPARATION FOR THE REAPPEARANCE OF THE WORLD SPIRITUAL TEACHER

It would take a hundred pages to analyse all the material on the ACC site so I encourage the reader to take a look at the articles listed above for themselves. Perhaps the most interesting pages are the minutes from their meetings discussing how they will “recognise the World Spiritual Teacher and introduce him to the world.” Top UN officials attend these meetings!!

We know these are unprecedented times on our planet and millions within humanity have the opportunity to make a major leap in consciousness. Involved in the process of planetary initiation is the externalization of the Hierarchy of Masters of Wisdom and thereappearance of the Christed One – the World Spiritual Teacher. Many of us here believe we incarnated at just this time in order to help in the needed preparatory work that must pave the “Path of Light” for these wondrous event… This sparked the thought of the Earth as our Mother. We are part of the earth mind set, drawing closer and closer to that feminine principle, possibly drawing problems of the entire earth to ourselves.” – link

The Baha’i and the UN

While researching for this article I have been very surprised at the extent of the involvement of the Baha’i religion in the United Nations. However, perhaps it is not so surprising when you realise that Maurice Strong is a devout Baha’i and was the leader of the organisation in North America. The Baha’i community has, as a duly accredited non-governmental organization, long worked closely with the United Nations, supporting many of its goals and programs, and taking a leadership role in several international gatherings. Its involvement in the United Nations dates back to the founding of the UN in 1945.

In 1947, the Baha’i communities of the United States and Canada were recognised by the UN Department of Public Information (DPI), and the next year, the Baha’i International Community itself was recognised by the UN as an international non-governmental organization. In May 1970, they were granted consultative status with the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), then under the leadership of Robert Muller, allowing for a greater degree of interaction with the Council and its subsidiary bodies.

On their own website the Baha’i boast that their representatives provide leadership in a number of UN-related bodies, including the NGO/Department of Public Information Executive Committee, the Committee of Religious NGOs, the Values Caucus, the Millennium NGO Network for U.N. reform, the Commission on the Status of Women and the Commission on Sustainable Development. Since then they have also been granted consultative status with the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), and relationships with the many UN bodies have deepened and expanded over the years.

The Baha’i organisation claims to have a close working relationship with the World Health Organization (WHO) and with the United Nations Environment Programme. It is also involved in joint activities with UNIFEM and UNICEF as well as many other religious, environmental and social programs within the UN. The Baha’i spiritual beliefs mirror almost exactly those described by the Lucis Trust and AAC described above. They too are waiting for the imminent arrival of an ‘Enlightened Being’ who will lead humanity into a ‘new world order’:

For Baha’is, the term “new world order” has a special and clear-cut meaning. More than 100 years ago, Baha’u’llah invoked the phrase to categorize a future series of momentous changes in the political, social and religious life of the world. “The signs of impending convulsions and chaos can now be discerned, inasmuch as the prevailing Order appeareth to be lamentably defective,” He wrote. “Soon will the present-day order be rolled up and a new one spread out in its stead. Baha’is understand that the dramatic changes and transformations we have witnessed over the last century – and which we are continuing to see – have been initiated by the coming of a new Messenger of God and influenced by the breaking light of a new Revelation.” – link

The Baha’i faith sees the United Nations as the vessel by which the unifying of the world’s religions into one faith will come to fruition. Their plan for the future of our world and the role of the United Nations overseeing a regionalised world mirror almost directly the proposal outlined by Maurice’ Strong Commission on Global Governance. Baha’i writings state “the oneness of humanity implies an organic change in the structure of present-day society, a change such as the world has not yet experienced. It calls for no less than the reconstruction and the demilitarization of the whole civilized world – a world organically unified in all the essential aspects of life, its political machinery, its spiritual aspiration, its trade and finance, its script and language.”

In a statement to the World Summit on Sustainable Development in August 2002, the Baha’i Community wrote, “despite significant achievements, the United Nations has yet to grasp fully both the constructive role that religion can play in creating a peaceful and prosperous global order, and the destructive impact that religious fanaticism can have on the stability and progress of the world. The UN must work untiringly to exorcise religious bigotry and superstition from within their faith traditions and renounce claims to religious exclusivity and finality.” In other words Christianity, Judaism and Islam are forms of religious bigotry that must be exorcised from the world system.

Reform of the United Nations

As discussed in my article entitled A United World the UN is currently considering various proposals to reform the organisation. Perhaps the most interesting, at least to this writer, is the proposal to replace the ten Security Council members with representatives from ten geographical unions. This concept was first proposed by the Club of Rome in 1974 in their report Mankind at the Turning Point:

Paths of development, region-specific rather than based on narrow national interests, must be designed to lead to a sustainable balance between the interdependent world-regions and to global harmony. A “horizontal” restructuring of the world system is needed, i.e., a change in relationships among nations and regions and as far as the “vertical” structure of the world system is concerned, drastic changes in the norm stratum. Cooperation by definition connotes interdependence. Increasing interdependence between nations and regions must then translate as a decrease in independence.”

Maurice Strong chaired the UN’s Commission on Global Governance and it’s final report clearly stated: “Regionalism must precede globalism. We foresee a seamless system of governance from local communities, individual states, regional unions and up through to the United Nations itself. The concept of national sovereignty has been immutable, indeed a sacred principle of international relations. It is a principle which will yield only slowly and reluctantly to the new imperatives of global environmental cooperation.”

While in its present form the United Nations may appear to be an impotent bungling bureaucracy many organisations are anxiously anticipating a new reformed empowered ‘UN version 2.’ The Club of Rome claims that at the right moment it will “bring order out of chaos.” As I have previously stated this reformed United Nations is likely to rise from the ashes of a major world crisis and will no doubt be lead by a charismatic world leader, perhaps assisted by this ‘World Spiritual Teacher.’

A United Green Religion

Blending the world’s religions together and bringing them under the umbrella of the United Nations has been high on the Global Green Agendafor many years. Dr Robert Muller, until recently the Assistant Secretary General of the United Nations, and its #2 ranked official, appears to be the driving force behind the plan to create a new United Religion. His passion for this spiritual agenda is readily apparent, “My great personal dream is to forge a tremendous alliance between all religions and spiritual groups, and the UNWe desperately need a United Religions Organisation to bring reconciliation, unity and peace to all the peoples of our world.

Dr Muller famously described himself as “A divine motivator … the wise man of the UN … the shaman of the UN … the man through whom God speaks … the spokesman of Christ …” Now this ‘divine motivator’ was the co-founder of UNESCO and a key architect behind many of the UN’s most important environmental policies and plans. Dr Muller is also one of the key figures behind the drive to establish a universal global consciousness. He is the co-Chairman of the World Commission for Global Consciousness and Spirituality and the co-Chairman, alongside Mikhail Gorbachev, of the World Wisdom Council. Dr Muller is also the Chancellor of the UN’s University of Peace, which he founded on a mountain in Costa Rica. Why did he choose this location? Because of this ancient prophecy:

The Great Spirit is in every animal, in every bird, butterfly, flower, insect, leaf and grass you see. The Great Spirit is also in you, the Creator’s children. Please take care of the wonderful nature created by God and some day, from this mountain, you will see the birth of a civilization of peace spread to the entire world.” – link

Dr Muller’s clearly outines his vision for a New Green Religion on his websites http://www.paradiseearth.us/http://www.robertmuller.org/,http://www.goodmorning-world.blogspot.com/ and http://www.goodmorningworld.org/. In one article he recounts a conversation between himself and God, as equals no less. These are quotes from that article (remember this is not some fruitcake standing on a streetcorner, this guy was responsible for formulating many UN policies) :

God: Dear Robert, congratulations for having finished your 4000 ideas. May I ask you: which one do you consider the most important?

I: Well, my most important idea and conclusion after all my adult life as a world civil servant is this: The United Nations must be vastly strengthened to resolve the major global problems henceforth increasingly confronting humanity and the earth. It must be empowered to adopt and enforce world laws and regulations. Let us perform this miracle in the House of Mica, on the shores of the River of the Rising Sun, wherefrom our indigenous brethren prophesized that a civilization of peace will extend to the entire world.

God: Thank you, dear Robert, for what you are recommending. Perhaps after all, the greatest jewel of my Creation, the Earth, can be saved.“ – link

The first attempt at global interfaith dialogue occurred at the first ‘Parliament of World Religions’ held in Chicago in 1893. This conference involved representatives from most established and emerging religious groups and also marked the introduction of the Baha’i faith into the United States. In the early 1990s a group of interfaith dialogue proponents decided to organise a centenary conference to be held in 1993, also in Chicago.

Dr Muller was one of the primary organisers, along with Hans Kung and Dr. Gerald Barney, and was a keynote speaker. Kung is a Catholic priest who previously held the powerful position of ‘Expositor of Theology’ at the Vatican and is the founder of the Global Ethic Foundation, another organization strongly pushing the concept of human global consciousness. The conference included more than 8,000 representatives from 150 different religious and spiritual groups. Dr Muller’s speech was entitled ‘A Proposal to establish a United Nations of Religion‘. It received a prolonged standing ovation and his proposal was endorsed in the conferences joint communique.

Our earth cannot be changed unless in the not too distant future an alteration in the consciousness of individuals is achieved. This has already been seen in areas such as war and peace or economy and ecology. And it is precisely for this alteration in inner orientation, in the entire mentality, in the “heart,” that religion bear responsibility in a special way. Religion must be a unifier and peacemaker, not a cause for violence and separation.” – excerpt, Parliament of World Religions Joint Communique.

The centenary parliament led to the formation of interfaith dialogue initiatives by many religious groups, most notably the Vatican, and secular organisations such as the United Nations, the Gorbachev Foundation, the Clinton Global Initiative, and many UN associated NGOs. However, it was the United Religions Initiative (URI), proposed by Robert Muller during the conference that has made the most dramatic progress.

The URI’s stated aims are “unity among religions” and “manifesting love for the Earth.” Working closely with Muller on this daring initiative is the Anglican Bishop William Swing of Grace Episcopal Cathedral in San Francisco. Although Muller is the visionary behind United Religions and the catalyst between the major parties involved, Swing has become the initiative’s figurehead and spokesperson.

However, the direct involvement of the United Nations in this project has been evident from the beginning. Swing relates how Muller first contacted him in 1993 about heading up a worship celebration on its behalf: “Three and a half years ago, a telephone call arrived in San Francisco from the United Nations asking if we, at Grace Cathedral, would host a great interfaith worship service honoring the 50th Anniversary of the signing of the UN Charter in our city.” This request, and subsequent conversation with Muller, is allegedly what prompted Swing to become involved in the United Religions Initiative. He continues, “I got out of bed the next day determined to commit the rest of my life to an initiative that would create a United Religions which would, in appropriately spiritual ways, parallel the United Nations.”

The URI has attracted a diverse group of followers, and seems to be remarkably skilful in appealing to there different worldviews. Reverend James Davis, an Anglican minister from New York stated “We’ve never seen any organization build coalitions as quickly or as successfully as the United Religions Initiative.” Huston Smith, a scholar of comparative religions and author of The World’s Religions, a standard reference in religious studies, describes the URI as “by far the most significant global interfaith effort.”

The URI claims that more than 1,000 religious groups, representing 600 million people, have endorsed the URI charter. These include the Dalai Lama, state churches in China, various Jewish Rabbis, Sufi’s (a Muslin sect), the Rev. Sun Myung Moon, radical feminists, deep ecologists, creation spiritualists, kaballahists and various neopagan groups. It has also received favourable comments from the United Nations and the Vatican. The preamble to the URI Charter is as follows:

Preamble

We, people of diverse religions, spiritual expressions and indigenous traditions throughout the world, hereby establish the United Religions Initiative to promote enduring, daily interfaith cooperation, to end religiously motivated violence and to create cultures of peace, justice and healing for the Earth and all living beings.

We respect the uniqueness of each tradition, and differences of practice or belief.

We value voices that respect others, and believe that sharing our values and wisdom can lead us to act for the good of all.

We believe that our religious, spiritual lives, rather than dividing us, guide us to build community and respect for one another.

Therefore, as interdependent people rooted in our traditions, we now unite for the benefit of our Earth community.

We unite to build cultures of peace and justice.

We unite to heal and protect the Earth.

We unite to build safe places for conflict resolution, healing and reconciliation.

We unite to support freedom of religion and spiritual expression, and the rights of all individuals and peoples as set forth in international law.

We unite in responsible cooperative action to bring the wisdom and values of our religions, spiritual expressions and indigenous traditions to bear on the economic, environmental, political and social challenges facing our Earth community.

We unite to provide a global opportunity for participation by all people, especially by those whose voices are not often heard.

We unite to celebrate the joy of blessings and the light of wisdom in both movement and stillness.

We unite to use our combined resources only for nonviolent, compassionate action, to awaken to our deepest truths, and to manifest love and justice among all life in our Earth community.

It goes on to say: The root of this ecological crisis is a spiritual crisis. Just as the religions and spiritual traditions of the world teach respectful interaction with a sacred whole, so must spiritual values and moral imperatives help humanity to rediscover a reverence for all life and respect for the sacredness of the whole of Planet Earth. Therefore, we call for interfaith cooperation in furthering this vision for love and protection of the Earth, reverence for life, and harmony with all living beings.

As suggested by Swing, the United Religions Initiative is intended to be to religion what the United Nations has become to global politics, unifying the world’s religions as the UN is unifying the world’s nations. Bishop Swing confirmed these plans, “The URI will be a spiritual United Nations. And what better place to give it birth than the Bay Area, which gave birth to the present UN.”

Bishop Swing also states, “The URI will offer the world a powerful new vision of hope – the vision that the deepest stories we know can now cease to be causes of separation between people, and become instead the foundation for a reunited humanityReligions need the URI. Bombs are exploding in the name of God in cities throughout the world, religious persecution is more prevalent now than ever before, religious extremists are demanding and obtaining nuclear weapons, and still there is no neutral arena where all of the religions can engage each otherThe URI, in time, aspires to have the visibility and stature of the United Nations. It will have global visibility and will be a vital presence in local communities all over the world.

The United Nations has granted the URI official ‘liaison status’, which means that in return for UN financial support the URI will “co-operate closely with the U.N. and its organisations to complement the U.N.’s political, diplomatic and social mandates, influence U.N. policy and support its programs.” At a recent UN-sponsored Interfaith Conference, Bishop Swing issued a challenge for a new global civilisation, “We stand on the threshold of a new world order that may be defined either by an increasing polarisation that fuels a spiral of escalating conflict and violence, or by growing global cooperation that calls the human race to work across national, ethnic and religious boundaries to serve a larger global good.”

Bishop Swing recently apologised for two millennia of Christian evangelism. His apology not limited to ‘religious violence’ committed by Christians, it also includes regret for “proclaiming that Jesus Christ is Lord and Savior of all” and for seeking “to make the whole world Christian“. The URI strongly condemns all forms of religious fundamentalism; in fact the need for a new spirituality is often based on the intolerant attitude of evangelical Christians and radical Muslims’. Swing states “Because some day, the ascendancy of militant fundamentalist voices of politically aspiring religions might be so pervasive that a United Religions will need to be created in order to save religions from these fundamentalists.”

The URI arose out of, and is the culmination of, the interfaith movement that began with the 1893 Parliament of World Religions. It is inextricably tied to the quest for a new spirituality that would unify the planet in a ‘transformed global society’. The URI is the fullest expression of this movement now. The current model of unity in diversity will characterise the United Religions Initiative for a while. However, the final phase of the Global Green Spiritual Agenda will be the “full end to the great heresy of separateness.

The final green religion will be the blending of all religions into one unified expression of spirituality based on reverence for our shared planet and human interconnectedness with all living beings. No doubt anyone one who refuses to accept this new spirituality will be labelled an intolerant radical fundamentalist. In the wake of an earth-shattering crisis, such as the one described in A United World, ‘fundamentalists’ are likely to be blamed for all the world’s problems. A new world religion, in addition to a new world order, will be gratefully received by most given a crisis of sufficient magnitude.

According to the United Nations, “Agenda 21 is a comprehensive plan of action to be taken globally, nationally and locally by organizations of the United Nations System, Governments, and Major Groups in every area in which human impacts on the environment.”

Agenda 21 is actually a world-wide blueprint for international totalitarian control of all the earth, and its resources — including “human resources”. The goal of Agenda 21 is “sustainable development” — a term used to expound upon the U.N. position that human beings are destroying the earth’s atmosphere, its wildlife, and natural resources.

Agenda 21

[pdf formathtml on this sitehtml on UN site]
Read the actual United Nations blueprint for totalitarian control, international welfare and global Communism.

Local Agenda 21 Survey

This is the document that awoke Chris Gerner to the subject of Agenda 21. “By 1996 most local authorities in each country should have undertaken a consultative process with their populations and achieved a consensus on a ‘local Agenda 21’ for the community.” —Agenda 21, Section 28.28

Agenda 21 Links for your additional research

A saved Copernic search on the subject, containing several relevant links for your continued research.

Anti-Communitarian League

Excellent Research Site on Agenda 21!
The ACL is a grassroots American research institute that studies communitarian politicians and programs. Our national goal is to inform and educate our countrymen who have yet to be told their government was reinvented in 1993. Our international slant is supported by pre-communist U.S. history and pre-interventionist American foreign policy. We seek out innovative, non-violent ways that will restore our national system of laws and political economy. We aim to expose and abolish communitarianism as a manufactured Marxist synthesis. We’ve proven it is not the solution they claim; it is factually the cause of our decline into endless international and domestic conflicts.

Big Media Won’t Touch Agenda 21
“I keep waiting, and waiting, and waiting for Bill O’Reilly or Shaun Hannity or Oprah Winfrey or somebody…..anybody, who has daily access to the multitudes, to say the words, “Agenda 21.” I’m still waiting, and for the life of me, I don’t understand the refusal to talk about the greatest threat to America that has ever existed….”

Virtual Library on Sustainable Development
A few dead links, but hundreds of links for your research on SD and A-21.

The Earth Charter Campaign

The Earth Charter is an authoritative synthesis of values, principles, and aspirations that are widely shared by growing numbers of men and women in all regions of the world. The principles of the Earth Charter reflect extensive international consultations conducted over a period of many years. These principles are also based upon contemporary science, international law, and the insights of philosophy and religion. Successive drafts of the Earth Charter were circulated around the world for comments and debate by nongovernmental organizations, community groups, professional societies, and international experts in many fields.

Global Vision

Global Vision Corporation is an independent non-profit Non Governmental Organisation (NGO) accredited to the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD), a network of fifty-three Governments and over 700 NGOs collaborating to implement Agenda 21, the international action plan for the sustainable development of our planet which was agreed by 185 nations at the UN Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. [read more].

Scenic Byways

Controlling private property usage “as far as the eye can see”. [more info]

Americans Against Traffic Calming

Traffic Calming equals restrictions on your right to travel. AATC are citizens from all walks of life putting out the call for much needed Traffic Calming “Reform”.

Bella Via Community

A proposed “sustainable community”.

Church of Euthanasia

“Save the planet; kill yourself.”

Peace by Pieces – the Role of Non-Governmental Organizations

To learn how the implementation of the U.N. agenda is taking place, utilizing Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), read this.

Business and Sustainable Development: A Global Guide
Strategies and tools companies can draw on to translate an aspiration of sustainability into solutions.

Cool Companies
Devoted to news, information, and resources about the companies that are leading the path to energy efficiency and greenhouse gas reduction.

DOE’s Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
There is no shortage of useful information at this site, which is searchable by keyword, provides links to information on the whole spectrum of energy-efficiency and renewable energy topics, information on the latest news, as well as a list of key contacts and a list of hot topics. EERE offers access to DOE’s national laboratory data bases on a host of topics, such as solar access and wind regimes. There is even a form to submit energy-related questions and lists of discussion groups on various energy-related topics.

Sustainable Sources
Information and resources on sustainable building services, practices, products, and techniques. The Sustainable Building Sourcebook is available online, and a searchable directory of green building professionals is located on this site. The site also offers green real estate listings.

Green Communities Assistance Kit
Developed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency as a step-by-step guide for identifying and resolving community needs, and planning and implementing sustainable actions. Also identifies useful tools, case studies, and other resources.

Green Map System
The Green Map System is a globally connected, locally adaptable framework for community sustainability. Green Maps chart the sites of environmental significance in urban places around the world. Each map is created locally in a unique way, and the mapmakers are of all ages and backgrounds.

Green Restaurant Association
GRA is a national non-profit organization that provides services in research, consulting, education, marketing and community organizing. GRA utilizes a collaborative strategy that involves restaurants, manufacturers, vendors, grassroots organizations, government, media, and restaurant customers. Its model provides a convenient way for all sectors of the restaurant industry, which represents 10 percent of the U.S. economy, to become more environmentally sustainable. Developed a large database of environmental solutions for the restaurant industry to help restaurants move towards sustainability in the areas of energy, water, packaging, recycling, construction, food, and more.

Harvesting Clean Energy
With a tagline, “Farming for Energy Independence,” this site was created to build awareness of the benefits of renewable energy technologies for rural landowners and communities in Washington, Oregon, Montana and Idaho. The site features primers on wind energy, biomasss, solar stock watering and geothermal projects. The website is a project of Climate Solutions, a nonprofit organization based in Olympia, Washington.

Institute for Local Self-Reliance
ILSR is a nonprofit education and research organization that provides information and assistance on topics related to sustainable development. For more than 20 years, ILSR has worked with citizen groups, governments, and private companies to develop sustainable development policies. Visit this Web site and you’ll find information about ILSR’s activities, such as its Carbohydrate Energy Program and its work with Minnesotans for an Energy-Efficient Economy, a coalition of organizations striving for a sustainable energy policy in Minnesota. You’ll also find information on a technical and educational reports on a variety of topics, including sustainable development and sustainable energy policy.

The Local Government Commission
The Local Government Commission provides peer networking opportunities, acts as an interface between city and county officials, and provides practical policy ideas for addressing serious environmental and social problems. Major program areas include Pedestrian and Transit Oriented Land Use Planning, Waste Prevention and Resource Conservation, Resource Efficient Land Use, and the Center for Livable Communities.

Looking for Oregon’s Future: What is Sustainability?
This website from the Oregon State University Extension Service has a goal to “promote dialogue among Oregonians concerning the future of our communities, industries, and economy, and concerning the quality of of life we want to make possible for our grandchildren.” The site features 33 articles about sustainability, an interactive quiz to test your sustainability knowledge and links to other sustainability sites.

NextStep
A project of the Minnesota Sustainable Communities Network, NextStep offers a host of useful information to promote community sustainable development. The site features 12 topic areas full of information, as well as a Sustainability 101 primer, a job board, and more. Users can even post information and resources to the site!

PLANetizen: The Planning and Development Network
PLANetizen is a public-interest information exchange for the urban planning and development community. The website provides a daily source of information on urban planning news, job opportunities, commentary and events.

Renewable Energy Policy Project – Center for Renewable Energy & Sustainable Technology
The REPP website provides extensive information on numerous aspects of renewable energy and energy efficiency, at levels from introductory to advanced technical. The site includes a calendar, discussion groups, data, and listings of employment opportunities in the field. Renewable energy information on hydro, solar, biomass, wind, and geothermal is offered, as well as micropower options and energy efficiency.

Resource Renewal Institute
RRI, a nonprofit organization, promotes the use of Green Plans to achieve a sustainable environment and economy. Green Plans are “dynamic programs by which all elements of society agree on long-term environmental goals and take responsibility for achieving them.” This Web site serves to educate and inform its users about Green Blocks, as well as to provide information on other resources and updates about what’s new at RRI. Access the Environmental Atlas for information on which communities across the world are implementing Green Plans and how they’re doing it. To access documents and speeches about Green Plans, visit the Green Plan Archive. Or join the Green Plan Forum mailing list to share comments and new information about Green Plans.

Sustainable Sonoma County
Sustainable Sonoma County is a non-profit organization that takes a holistic and comprehensive approach to problem-solving. The SSC website highlights sustainability concepts, notes numerous ways to get involved in sustainability issues, sponsors an online discussion group, and links to numerous other resources on sustainability. Current projects of SSC include sustainability interactive workshops, the Sustainable Urban Model creating a model of sustainable living in an urban setting, and the Sustainability Management Systems Coaching Program offering large organizations and businesses a systematic approach to becoming more sustainable.

TravelMatters!
TravelMatters! is a new website from the Center for Neighborhood Technology that provides a trio of resources- interactive emissions calculators, on-line emissions maps, and a wealth of educational content- that emphasize the close relationship between more efficient transit systems and lower greenhouse gas emissions. TM’s Emissions Calculator allows users to conceptualize how much carbon dioxide they emit due to their travel decisions. The site also offers transportation emissions by county for all contiguous states.

Urban Ecology
Through its worldwide membership, nonprofit Urban Ecology supports and participates in the development of ecologically healthy and socially vital cities and towns. At this Web site, you’ll be able to access information about projects such as Blueprint for a Sustainable Bay Area, which aims to create a vision for the Bay Area based on sustainable alternatives, and the Community Design Work project, through which Urban Ecology is offering communities a chance to participate in a “visionary, practical” approach to community design.

Minnesota Sustainable Communities Network
Minnesota: Sustainable Communities
Toward a Sustainable Washington
Transportation and Sustainable Communities
New Jersey Bureau of Sustainable Communities & Innovative Technologies
National Archives: Building Sustainable Communities
Center for a New American Dream

It is hence the purpose of Agenda 21 to curtail this supposed “threat”, by pushing for governments to implement policies, restricting populations of people from engaging in risky behavior that these globalists deem as lacking “sustainability”.

What behavior is considered risky or lacking “sustainability”? Virtually every behavior in which one engages in a free society. And that is the problem.

Under Agenda 21, land, water, minerals, the air, the population itself all must be tightly managed. Relocation of populations of people to “sustainable communities” is a necessary part of the “sustainable” equation.

If “sustainable development” is achieved, freedom will be nothing more than a fading memory on the global U.N. plantation.

Instrumental in the implementation of world-wide “sustainable development” — which is nothing less than world-wide Marxism — are numerous Non-Governmental Organizations. You will see links to many of these organizations below, for your further research. We will continue to add more links as we, and our excellent research partners discover them.

Also, see our section below, “Why should you care?” for hard-hitting information about how this program will ultimately change your life, if it is not stopped.

See how the blueprint is being implemented in the United States and by other governments:

Non Governmental Organizations (NGOs)
Working to Implement the U.N. System
American Rivers

“Since 1973, American Rivers has been dedicated to protecting and restoring healthy, natural rivers and the variety of life they sustain for people, fish and wildlife. A nonprofit membership organization, we lead the nationwide river movement. [more]

American Water Resources Association

“Founded in 1964, the American Water Resources Association is a non-profit professional association dedicated to the advancement of men and women in water resources management, research, and education. AWRA’s membership is multidisciplinary; its diversity is its hallmark. It is the professional home of a wide variety of water resources experts including engineers, educators, foresters, biologists, ecologists, geographers, managers, regulators, hydrologists and attorneys.” [more]

American Water Works Association

“AWWA advances public health, safety and welfare by uniting the efforts of the full spectrum of the drinking water community. Through our collective strength we become better stewards of water for the greatest good of the people and the environment. … The American Water Works Association is an international nonprofit scientific and educational society…” Founded in 1881. [more]

Campaign Interactive: Sustainable Cities Information System

“The Webpage of the European Sustainable Cities & Towns Campaign and the European Sustainable Cities Project! Campaign Interactive supports transfer of knowledge and exchange of experience in the field of urban sustainability and Local Agenda 21 in Europe, thereby helping implement the concept of sustainable development. It provides central access to comprehensive and up-to-date information relevant to all those working towards sustainability in an urban context.”

Center for Sustainable Design

“The Centre for Sustainable Design was established in 1995 within the Faculty of Design at The Surrey Institute of Art & Design, University College, in the UK. CfSD has organised over 30 conferences and workshops, and undertaken a wide range of research and training projects on eco-product development and sustainable product design. It has achieved an international reputation for high quality, innovative, leading-edge work. CfSD is supported by an international advisory board.”

Center for Renewable Energy Policy Project

“REPP’s goal is to accelerate the use of renewable energy by providing credible information, insightful policy analysis, and innovative strategies amid changing energy markets and mounting environmental needs by researching, publishing, and disseminating information, creating policy tools, and hosting highly active, on-line, renewable energy discussion groups.”

Earth Network for Sustainable Development

“The Earth Council is an international non-governmental organization (NGO) that was created in September 1992 to promote and advance the implementation of the Earth Summit agreements. It is led by a body of 18 Members, drawn from the world’s political, business, scientific and non-governmental communities. Sixteen eminent world leaders serve as Honorary Members, and an 18 member Earth Council Institute functions as an advisory board.”

EnviroLink Network

“EnviroLink is a non-profit organization… a grassroots online community that unites hundreds of organizations and volunteers around the world with millions of people in more than 150 countries. EnviroLink is dedicated to providing comprehensive, up-to-date environmental information and news. At EnviroLink we’re committed to promoting a sustainable society by connecting individuals and organizations through communications technologies. We recognize that our technologies are just tools, and that the solutions to our ecological challenges lie within our communities and their connection to the Earth itself.”

International Network for Sustainable Energy (INFORSE)

INFORSE and INFORSE members work for sustainable development in energy on all levels, from local to global. As part of this, INFORSE is working on a ‘Vision2050’. The aim is a 100% sustainable energy supply by 2050. National visions for Denmark, Romania, Ukraine.

International Standards Organization

A NGO, operating in cooperation with the World Trade Organization, which sets international standards for businesses world-wide.

Intentional Communities

“An ‘intentional community’ is a group of people dedicated with intent, purpose, and commitment to a mutual concern. Generally the group shares land or housing, or is otherwise close enough geographically to be in continuous active fellowship so that it can effectively carry out the purposes to which it is dedicated.”

International Institute for Sustainable Development

“For development to be sustainable it must integrate environmental stewardship, economic development and the well-being of all people—not just for today but for countless generations to come. This is the challenge facing governments, non-governmental organizations, private enterprises, communities and individuals. The International Institute for Sustainable Development meets this challenge by advancing policy recommendations on international trade and investment, economic policy, climate change, measurement and indicators, and natural resource management to make development sustainable…” This NGO also operates IISD Linkages, “a multi-media resource for environment and development policy makers”.

International Water Association

“IWA was founded in September 1999 by the merger of the International Association of Water Quality and the International Water Supply Association. … IWA collaborates with The World Bank, The World Health Organisation as well as the main UN agencies (UNEP, UNDP, UNESCO), dealing with water and sanitation on projects of common interest. IWA is a founder member of the World Water Council and is involved in the Global Water Partnership and the Collaborative Council on Water Supply and Sanitation. The Association is represented on the Nominating Committee for the Stockholm Water Prize and is a strong supporter of the yearly Stockholm Water Symposium. During 2000 IWA contributed substantially to the World Vision for Water in the 21st Century and was heavily involved in the World Water Forum in Den Haag, Netherlands in March 2000.” [more]

Minnesotans for an Energy Efficient Economy (Sustainable Minnesota)

All-encompassing site for Minnesota. “Sustainable Minnesota is the home page of Minnesotans for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ME3). The site was developed and is maintained by the Institute for Local Self-Reliance.”

Nautilus Institute for Security and Sustainability

“The Nautilus Institute for Security and Sustainable Development is to apply and refine the strategic tools of cooperative engagement in order to build global security and sustainability.” Also operates Pegasus Project, the Institute’s youth indoctrination program.

Negative Population Growth

“More people means more pollution, more sprawl, less green space, and even more demands on the earth’s already overburdened resources. NPG is the leader in the movement for a sound population policy and advocates a smaller and truly sustainable population through voluntary incentives for smaller families and reduced immigration levels.”

Northeast Sustainable Energy Association

“…The nation’s leading regional membership organization focused on promoting the understanding, development, and adoption of energy conservation and non-polluting, renewable energy technologies. For more than thirty years, NESEA has facilitated and enhanced a network of professionals, practitioners, and other citizens in pursuit of responsible energy use. Our programs and activities focus on the northeastern United States, from Washington, DC to Maine. NESEA is a chapter of the American Solar Energy Society.”

SD Dimensions

Sustainable Development Department of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

Sustainable Agriculture Network

“Information on sustainable agriculture for producers. Grants available for sustainable agriculture projects.”

SustainableBusiness.com

“We are witnessing the beginning of a profound transformation – the successor to the Agricultural and Industrial Revolutions – the Environmental Revolution. It seems to take a crisis for human beings to get serious about doing things differently. That is the silver lining to the grave environmental problems humankind is about to experience – out of the impending crisis will come true change. The transition to a green (clean) economy is underway. That’s what we believe at SustainableBusiness.com.”

Sustainable Energy and Economy Network

“The Sustainable Energy & Economy Network (SEEN) works to end World Bank and other government investment in fossil fuels based on their human rights, environmental, and developmental outcomes… SEEN, a project of the Institute for Policy Studies (Washington, DC) and the Transnational Institute (Amsterdam), works in partnership with citizens groups nationally and globally … Throughout this century, wars have been fought over fossil fuels. The reliance of rich countries on fossil fuels fosters a climate of insecurity, and a rationale for large military budgets in the North. In the South, it often fosters or nurtures autocratic or dictatorial regimes and corruption, while exacerbating poverty and destroying subsistence cultures and sustainable livelihoods. A continued rapid consumption of fossil fuels also ensures catastrophic environmental consequences: Climate change is a serious, emerging threat to the stability of the planet’s ecosystems, and a particular hazard to the world’s poorest people. The threat of climate change also brings more urgency to the need to reorient energy-related investments, using them to provide abundant, clean, safe energy for human needs and sustainable livelihoods.” [more]

Sustainable Communities Network

“The Corporation for National and Community Service (“the Corporation”) has announced the availability of approximately $4,000,000 to award Next Generation Grants to eligible nonprofit organizations. The purpose of these grants is to foster the next generation of national service organizations by providing seed money to help new and start-up organizations, and established organizations proposing new projects or programs, plan and implement new service programs that have the potential of becoming national in scope. These funds are available under authority provided in Public Law 108-7, the Omnibus Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2003.”

Sustainable Development Communications Network

“The Sustainable Development Communications Network (SDCN) is a group of leading civil society organizations seeking to accelerate the implementation of sustainable development through broader, integrated information and communications about what we know.” SDCN connects to the Sustainable Development Gateway. “The SD Gateway integrates the on-line information developed by members of the Sustainable Development Communications Network. In addition to over 1,200 documents available in SD Topics, we provide services such as a calendar of events, a job bank, the Sustainability Web Ring, a roster of mailing lists (listservs) and news sites dealing with sustainable development.”

Sustainable Development International

“Essential to the success of the publication is the strength of its subscription database, ie. the level of decision-makers, policy makers and key specifiers who receive Sustainable Development International. Working in co-operation with international bodies – including United Nations Agencies (CSD, UNIDO, UNEP); World Energy Council (WEC); Investment and Banking Authorities and the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) – we have built a subsription database of decision-makers at local, regional and national level as well as representatives of development agencies, NGO communities and international policy makers.”

The Sustainable Energy Coalition

“The Sustainable Energy Coalition brings together more than 30 national business, environmental, consumer, and energy policy organizations. Founded in 1992, the Coalition promotes increased federal support for energy efficiency and renewable energy technologies and reduced federal support for unsafe or polluting energy resources…” [more]

SusTrans (U.K.)

“Sustrans – the sustainable transport charity — works on practical projects to encourage people to walk, cycle and use public transport in order to reduce motor traffic and its adverse effects.”

Water Partners International

“WaterPartners International is committed to providing clean drinking water to communities in developing countries. We have solutions that work. Working in partnership with donors and those in need of safe water, we have helped thousands of people develop accessible, sustainable, community-level water supplies.”

Women’s Environment and Development Organization

This connects to Chapter 24 of Agenda 21, and according to the Anti-Communitarian League,at number 13. “This is how Agenda 21 ties to feminism.”

An international advocacy network that purports to strive for a healthy planet with social, political, economic and environmental justice for all through the empowerment of women. Features information on environmental links to breast cancer, women’s health, gender justice, UN conference followup, particularly monitoring of the Beijing Platform for Action and the Cairo Programme of Action. WEDO also publishes global reports on government and NGO action in response to these plan of actions. Co-founded by Bella Abzug in 1991.

World Toilet Organization

Flushing freedom down the toilet?

NGO of the U.N. and several international member organizations. It’s purported purpose is to set international standards for sanitation and design for the commodes of your community.

From the website: “When we go to ‘toilets away from home’ we sometimes put up with the many discomforts like hygiene problems, inadequate sanitation, design flaws and many other problems associated with public toilets. Public toilets serve the male and female but it goes beyond that. What about the visually, physically and mentally handicapped, the child, the elderly, or people with babies, as well as certain religious and cultural toilet requirements? The female visits the toilet 3 times longer than the male; logically they need more toilet cubicles because of the absence of urinals….”

Aren’t you glad there is an international arm of the U.N. to address these problems?

United Nations Development Programme

“From politics to security to public health, from crime to the environment, a growing agenda of development issues can no longer be managed within the boundaries of any single nation. Global, regional and national coalitions for action are emerging centred around the United Nations’ indispensable role. The UN can bring together governments, civil society, multinational corporations and multilateral organizations – coming together around particular issues of concern and looking for innovative ways to address them.” — Mark Malloch Brown, Administrator of UNDP.

“At the United Nations Millennium Summit, world leaders put development at the heart of the global agenda by adopting the Millennium Development Goals, which set clear targets for reducing poverty, hunger, disease, illiteracy, environmental degradation and discrimination against women by 2015. On the ground in 166 countries, UNDP uses its global network to help the UN system and its partners to raise awareness and track progress, while it connects countries to the knowledge and resources needed to achieve these goals.”

Also operates the Sustainable Development Network Programme, which “oversees national programs, making information technology more accessable” to developing countries.

U.S. Youth for Sustainable Development (Sustain US)

“SustainUS is a US national network of young people organizing around the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) in their schools and communities. We are committed to increasing youth participation in sustainable development issues, demanding government accountability to its citizens and adherence to international agreements, and working with all stakeholders to establish sustainable development practices. We educate young people about sustainable development, lobby decision makers, work with the media, and run projects that promote sustainability.”

World Business Council for Sustainable Development

“The World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) is a coalition of 170 international companies united by a shared commitment to sustainable development via the three pillars of economic growth, ecological balance and social progress. Our members are drawn from more than 35 countries and 20 major industrial sectors. We also benefit from a global network of 45 national and regional business councils and partner organizations located in 40 countries, involving some 1,000 business leaders globally. The WBCSD’s activities reflect our belief that the pursuit of sustainable development is good for business and business is good for sustainable development.”

World Education

“World Education is dedicated to improving the lives of the poor through economic and social development programs. World Education is well known for its work around the globe in environmental education, community development, maternal and child health, school governance, integrated literacy, small enterprise development, HIV/AIDS education and prevention and care, and refugee training. World Education also works to strengthen literacy and adult basic education programs in the United States. Projects are designed to contribute to individual growth, as well as to community and national development. Founded in 1951. [more]

Other Websites Promoting Sustainable
Development and the U.N. System