For more than 20 years, the politically correct liberal
elitists have ridiculed the "black helicopter crowd"
whenever the words "world
" were uttered. Global
governance, however, is a perfectly acceptable term the
U.N. says is somehow
different from world government
According to the U.N., "Governance is not government –
it is the framework of rules, institutions and practices
that set limits on the behavior of individuals,
organizations and companies" (UNDP Human Development
Report, 1999, page 34).
Any institution that has the power to issue rules and
that limits the behavior of individuals, organizations and
companies is a government. When those rules apply
worldwide, it is world government.
The difference between "global governance" and "world
government," is much like the difference between date rape
and rape. One begins with seduction; both end in violence.
If there ever were any doubt about President-elect
Obama's propensity toward global governance, it has
been removed by his Cabinet choices.
Hillary Clinton praised Walter Cronkite's attainment
of the World Federalist Association's "Global Governance"
award. As secretary of state, she will lead the U.S. into
the global village under the U.N.'s governance.
Susan Rice, who worked with
Strobe Talbot at the Brookings Institution, will be
the point person to see that the U.S. supports the global
Paramount among the rules required to make global
governance an enforceable reality is the power to control
each nation's use of energy. The Kyoto Protocol, promoted
Clinton and Al Gore, was supposed to be
that rule. To his credit, President Bush refused to
subject the United Sates to this U.N. treaty. Obama has
promised to change the U.S. position to one of submission
to a new U.N. Climate-Change Treaty, now under
construction in Poland.
Obama's representative at the climate change
negotiations in Poland is
Kerry, sent there to reassure the delegates from
around the world that the new administration will fully
support whatever energy limitations the U.N. decides to
Make no mistake; the new climate change treaty will
severely limit the supply of fossil fuel energy available
in the United States by limiting the quantity of carbon
emissions that can be released. The enforcement tool will
be costly. Rep. James Sensenbrenner told an audience at
the meeting in Poland that the new treaty could drive the
price of gasoline to $10 per gallon. In addition, a global
will arbitrarily limit the quantity of carbon
emissions allowed by virtually all energy users, and
releases beyond the limit will require a fee. Both the
limit and the fee will be determined by the U.N., thereby
giving the U.N. control over energy use in every nation.
The Kyoto Protocol already established the principle of
"common but differentiated" responsibilities, which means
developed nations must meet legally binding limitations –
while more than 150 nations have no binding limitations.
Through this mechanism, the U.N. can effectively
redistribute the world's wealth to ensure that all people
share equally the benefits of the earth's resources. This
goal is expressed in a host of U.N. treaties and policy
There is a parade of other U.N. treaties and policy
objectives lined up for approval by the new
administration: The Convention on the Law of the Sea, the
Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Convention
on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against
Women are but a few. Obama has already embraced the U.N.'s
Millennium Goals, which include a three-fold increase in
the U.S. contribution to the U.N.'s international aid
programs. Obama is also expected to submit the United
States to the jurisdiction of the International Criminal
Bush refused to do.
Global governance advocates made great strides during
Clinton years, but were temporarily
sidetracked by George Bush and Republicans in Congress.
With a new, expanded Democrat majority to support Obama's
aggressive global governance aspirations, national
sovereignty is on the brink of extinction. The global
economic downturn creates the perfect environment for a
global response. The G-20 meeting held in Washington last
month launched the final round of negotiations to create a
new global financial mechanism to control the flow of
money around the world.
While global governance advocates ridiculed and laughed
at "black helicopter" watchers, they steadily advanced
their agenda. Nowhere in the U.N. Global-governance agenda
is there any room for, or reference to, the fundamental
principle that government is empowered by the consent of
the people, expressed at the
The global governance agenda says that land use must be
controlled by government; that speech must be regulated by
law; that trade must be regulated by government; that
education and child-rearing is the responsibility of
government; that only the U.N. has the authority to
regulate the manufacture, use and distribution of all
This is global
This is the "change" that Obama promised; this is the
change he will deliver.