by Susanne Posel
December 15, 2012

from OccupyCorporatism Website
 

The American Geophysical Union (AGU) meeting last week referred to the eco-fascist ideals of Anthropocene, a new human-influence era where biodiversity is threatened out of being because of human waste and the force reshaping of our earth’s landscape through the mere existence of man.

Anthony Brown, researcher at the University of Southampton in the UK claims that he is searching for the geological record to prove that humans are negatively affecting the course of life on this planet.

The term Anthropocene has been popularized by alarmist scientists who want to incriminate the human race.

“Welcome to the Anthropocene”, and its website are telling “the story of how one species changed a planet.”

That species is human beings...

We have over-run the planet through over-population and heated the earth with our out of control carbon. As a result the polar ice caps are melting, sea levels are rising, and global sustainability is threatened.

But these United Nations scientists have a plan to fix all of this:

Movement toward criminalizing the human population is demanded by eco-extremists such as Polly Higgins, the earth’s first lawyer and creator of the term ecocide.

Ecocide is defined as,

“the extensive damage to, destruction of or loss of ecosystem(s) of a given territory, whether by human agency or by other causes, to such an extent that peaceful enjoyment by the inhabitants of that territory has been or will be severely diminished.”

Defined in the proposed Ecocide Act, all nations, corporations and individuals would be,

“under the principle of superior responsibility” and legal obligation to “ensure their actions do not give rise to the risk of and/or actual extensive damage to/or destruction of or loss of ecosystem(s).”

International mandate would empower eco-fascists to hold any nation, corporation or individual accountable for damage to or loss of any ecosystem and determine the legal ramifications of such actions which would include imprisonment and costs to restore the destroyed area.

The legislation justifying this remedy would be the Proceeds of Crimes Act of 2002.

In the name of good environmental governance, usurping authority over persons, corporations and nations for the sake of ensuring the viability of our planet’s future seeks to ensure the United Nations and their factions have their hand over our lives indefinitely:

'Planet Under Pressure' has released their State of the Planet Declaration which is a collection of scientists referring to an “Earth System Governance”.

Their declaration states:

“Governments must take action to support institutions and mechanisms that will improve coherence, as well as bring about integrated policy and action across the social, economic and environmental pillars.

 

Current understanding supports the creation of a Sustainable Development Council within the UN system to integrate social, economic and environmental policy at the global level.

 

There is also strong support for strengthening global governance by including civil society, business and industry in decision-making at all levels.”

In a Stanford University alarmist policy paper entitled “Navigating the Anthropocene: Improving Earth System Governance”, a set of institutions will have to be formed to enforce transition.

The paper explains:

“Human societies must now change course and steer away from critical tipping points in the Earth system that might lead to rapid and irreversible change.

 

This requires fundamental reorientation and restructuring of national and international institutions toward more effective Earth system governance and planetary stewardship.”

Global governance will formulate its decisions through consensus.

Consensus is the majority-based rule, which is a perversion of actual coming to agreement within a group. Those who are higher up will decide for those lower down the rung. This allows for hidden political and economic agendas to be passed into “law” at a much higher rate than is allowable within our democratic electoral process.

A panel of “experts” will select councils, which will be governed by regents.

“Global governance through UN-type institutions tends to give a larger role to international and domestic bureaucracies, at the cost of national parliaments and the direct involvement of citizens.”

This removes local institutions, replacing them with a pre-determined representative system.

They entitle responsible and administrative sectors will be strengthened,

“through special rights enshrined in agreements or stronger participation in councils that govern resources and in commissions that hear complaints.”

In the end, the UN Security Council will have the power to make sure countries and nations comply.

Economies will be reduced to “emissions markets” where poorer countries will receive support under “equity and fairness”.

This effectually allows the United Nations to control the amount of emissions a nation can and will be allowed to contribute to the atmosphere. Under the hoax of climate change, the UN will absolutely control the literal movements of individuals, and nations.

This rhetoric sits well with the plans of the United Nations to take control over the world:

sitting as the authoritative global governing body.

In what SA refers to as a “constitutional moment”, they look forward to the coming 2012 UN Conference on Sustainable Development and the UN’s General Assembly that will decide,

• how to better handle the Earth’s water supplies

• how to gain power over energy and food

• a revamping of international environmental institutions