In this issue…
Liberty Matters News Service
What’s Next for Conservatives?
Remember Cattle Free by ’93? Here Comes “30 x 30.”
The Battlground is Local
Speaking of Local Action
Greens Track Deniers
Liberty Matters News Service
In the late 1990’s, we launched the Liberty Matters News Service to deliver credible information to the grassroots using the latest technology of the times, a FaxBack service. Today, we dust off and modernize this vehicle using the power of the internet to provide Americans with information on the policies being advanced that impact our private property rights.
Property rights were viewed by our Founding Fathers as the most essential right, because all other freedoms depend on our right to own property, from using our land to defending our homes and protecting our freedom of speech and religion. As John Adams wisely stated, “Property must be secured or liberty cannot exist.”
This viewpoint, however, is at risk of being censored by the liberal media because it stands in opposition to the socialist agenda. This is why we have revived the Liberty Matters News Service; to ensure this critical information reaches your inbox.
What’s Next for Conservatives?
Liberals have been eroding our property rights for environmental causes, indoctrinating our children with socialist ideals, monopolizing the major communication platforms and narratives with Robber Barren control, and inoculating Americans against truth and freedom for decades. The corona virus was a tipping point, creating the chaos essential to stop an almost guaranteed second term for President Trump. Now the socialists are in charge.
John Solomon from Just the News dissects how conservatives lost and offers three strategic targets we should be pursuing: (1) Regain control of the statehouses in the battleground states and rewrite the rules for elections; (2) Build an information ecosystem that rivals the liberals; and, (3) Target funding for civic education, empowerment of state legislators and media-platform building.
“The November election … wasn’t won and lost by the tactics, spending, individual players and messaging in the weeks before Nov. 3,” writes Solomon. “Rather, its outcome was cemented long before Labor Day 2020 by a Democratic machinery of former Barack Obama proteges, like David Plouffe, John Podesta, David Axelrod and Stacey Abrams, who worried far less about the tactics of ads, travel (Joe Biden hardly did!) and fundraising and far more about the strategy of how to control the narrative and the rules that would shape the outcome.”
Former House Speaker, Newt Gingrich weighed in reminding conservatives that in times before when liberals have attempted to silence the conservative voice, they were faced with a stronger more powerful conservative response. In the 1980’s, when major media became predominantly liberal, Rush Limbaugh pioneered the wave of conservative talk radio, still immensely powerful today. In the 1990’s when CNN’s liberal approach dominated cable networks, Fox News was launched eventually outperforming the liberal station.
Already today, we see the rise of even more conservative networks, such as Newsmax and One American News (OAN).
“Now, we have the latest effort by the left to rig the game, smother dissent, and dictate what we can think, say, and believe,” writes Gingrich. “Competition will destroy this left-wing groupthink machine much more quickly, decisively — and safely — than any effort to regulate or supervise the big internet giants, which will take massive time and effort to defeat their lobbying machines. There are more than 74 million Americans who voted for President Trump. At least half of them would be a potential market for an alternative social media-web hosting system.”
Gingrich reminds us that “Competition is the best way to defeat efforts at monopoly and domination.”
Unlike liberals, conservatives have not abandoned the principles that made America the greatest nation in the world. We employ the values of capitalism, self-reliance, and honest work to succeed. “For a righteous man may fall seven times and rise again, but the wicked shall fall by calamity.” (Proverbs 24:16)
Watch us rise.
“How the GOP Lost Control of Washington, and What Comes Next” | Just the News
GINGRICH: Big Tech is a Big Fraud with its Bogus Censorship | The Washington Times
Remember Cattle Free by ’93? Here Comes “30 x 30.”
The year 2030 is the next utopia target for liberals. The “Green New Deal” agenda calls for the end of fossil fuel use by 2030, and the World Economic Forum’s “8 Predictions for the World in 2030” envisions a society where we no longer own anything (cars, land, household appliances, not anything) but instead pay for the use of these products as services. Although these goals might seem unrealistic today, never doubt that this is where the radical left is preparing to take us.
A more serious contender for actual implementation under the Biden Administration, however, is a program called “30 x 30,” which calls for 30% of America’s land and oceans to be permanently protected by 2030. The Center for America Progress released the plan in 2019, where they found that only 12% of America’s land is “permanently” protected “as national parks, wilderness areas, permanent conservation easements, state parks, national wildlife refuges, national monuments, or other protected areas.” (“How Much Nature Should America Keep”). An attempt to more than double this figure in nine short years would be a massive land grab.
However, environmentalists are pushing to make this a key part of the Biden-Harris agenda. Proponents have recently published editorials in major publications signaling this is what they want to see from the new administration, and recreation interests have privately met with the nominated Department of Interior Secretary, Rep. Deb Haaland, calling for the implementation of the agenda.
They have good reason to believe the new administration will embrace the goals. As Senator, the new Vice President, Kamala Harris co-sponsored the “30 x 30” Senate Resolution 372 in 2019. President Biden told a midwestern farmer on the campaign trail that his plan was to have farmers place their land in “land banks” and be told what they could grow.
The “30 x 30″ agenda is based on the “Half Earth” concept of ecologist Edward O. Wilson. “To confront the deterioration of natural systems and the loss of biodiversity around the world, scientists recommend adopting a range of strategies—from pollution reduction to combating invasive species. But the most basic, essential, and effective way to keep nature healthy is to protect more land and ocean areas in their natural condition.”
The report continues to explain their “scientific” reasoning based on this ideal. “Ecologist Edward O. Wilson has recommended that half the Earth’s surface be conserved in a natural state. This ‘Half Earth’ prescription, as it has come to be known, is ‘the only way to save upward of 90 percent of the rest of life’.”
How considerate to only demand 30% of our land … for now. In fact, they say exactly that: “… if the United States achieves 30×30, the country will be well positioned to pursue a longer-term goal of conserving half of all its lands and waters.”
They justify this action by concluding the worlds natural areas are being eroded by human use and that the public wants this protected. “In fact, overwhelming majorities—85 percent—of voters support significantly increasing the amount of lands and ocean areas that the United States protects. This broad and intense base of support should give policymakers, thought leaders, and candidates for office ample encouragement to develop a far more ambitious suite of policy solutions to help curb the loss of America’s natural areas and wildlife.”
Private land is a primary target for the agenda. “Although private lands account for approximately 60 percent of the land area in the contiguous 48 states, less than 1 percent of these lands are permanently managed for conservation. Meanwhile, more than three-quarters of the natural area that the United States lost in the contiguous 48 states from 2001 to 2017 was on private lands.” They believe 75% (three-quarters) of the natural areas being eroded in the nation is occurring on lands privately owned. This thinking justifies their call to move a significant amount of private land into permanent protection.
They soften the target pinned on private landowners by assuring their intentions are to help the owners. “The United States will not reach a 30 x 30 goal unless policymakers do more to help farmers, ranchers, fishermen, and other private landowners conserve lands, waters, and wildlife.”
By “helping” landowners, there are only a few paths they can pursue: (1) outright taking the land to be secured under federal programs like Parks, Refuges, and Monuments; or, (2) encouraging landowners to give up control of their property and place these in permanent conservation easements and land banks. They may offer tax incentives and other payments in the process, but with the powerful regulatory tools they have on their side and a willing administration, landowners would be naive to believe if they are targeted for the program, they will not face immense pressure to comply.
“How Much Nature Should America Keep” | Center for American Progress
Can Environmentalists Oppose the Border Wall and be Against Illegal Immigration? | The Washington Times
8 Predictions for the World in 2030 | World Economic Forum
The Battleground is Local
Every Federal and State land use agenda must be implemented at the local level. The new Policy Coordination Guide for Local Governments, recently released by American Stewards of Liberty, gives local governments an upgraded set of tools to set clear policies at the local level that allow coordination of these with Federal and State agencies. Advocating for the rights of the citizens in these contentious battles over the use of America’s land, is essential to ensure a strong local economy.
If your local government does not have sound policies in place, and does not actively engage in the coordination process, then your area could easily be vulnerable to the radical changes expected to come from Washington, D.C.
The purpose of coordination is to achieve policy consistency across the three levels of government. The Guide points out the need to have a robust and updated planning document, such as a Natural Resource or Comprehensive Plan, in place. Having clear, direct and on point policies active prior to the expected coming wave of land control policies under a Biden administration, is essential to protecting our ability to produce food, fiber, and energy for the American people.
Speaking of Local Action
The Republican Party Central Committee in Carbon County, Wyoming, has censured Wyoming’s House Representative, Liz Cheney, for voting to impeach President Trump. The 45-member committee passed the resolution unanimously and are demanding she appear before them — a nice example of a local entity requiring their representatives be accountable. If you think such actions are futile, considering Rep. Cheney has refused to respond, you would be mistaken.
The story appeared on the second page of The Washington Times, one of the major national publications that circulates in Washington D.C.. This is a strong signal to every politician that when they fail to represent the people, conservatives will act boldly at the local level.
Local governments should require elected leaders and the Federal and State agencies to explain their positions when they make policy decisions contrary and harmful to the local community. This is where the consequences of those decisions are directly paid.
Wyoming Republicans Censure Cheney Over Vote | The Washington Times
Greens Track Deniers
E & E News reported that a coalition of environmental leaders have been tracking on-line conversations of “climate deniers,” since as early as 2018. The coalition includes representatives from Friends of the Earth, Environmental Defense Fund, UpShift Strategies, Sierra Club, Greenpeace, Earthjustice, the Union of Concerned Scientists and InfluenceMap.
The group is concerned that climate deniers may be able to stop significant policy changes under a Biden administration and are designing methods to prevent this information from spreading across news and social media platforms. “Due to a belief in conspiracies, strong ideological ties or other reasons, some people don’t accept the scientific consensus on climate change: that the Earth is warming mainly due to human activities like burning fossil fuels and converting forests to cropland,” stated a coalition representative.
The coalition is working on an “inoculation” strategy, where they disseminate a “weakened” version of a climate deniers claim, (partially true and partially false) then soundly rebuke this as false. Since most people are looking for quick information they can trust, all it takes is one event to discredit a source, and they have a loyal convert.
Conservatives especially need to be mindful of this tactic, and importantly, not provide the fire. This past week we saw a claim that 150 businesses were calling for the immediate removal of President Trump, prior to the end of his term. The actual letter, dated January 4th, called for a swift and orderly transfer of power, but it did not call for this to be done prior to January 20th. Partially true, partially false, but discredited, nonetheless.
In 2020, the coalition hired Graphika, a social media analytics firm, to map online conversations on climate change. The coalition “gave the social media monitoring firm a list of people deemed climate deniers by DeSmogBlog, a website critical of corporate claims against climate action.” The coalition receives updates from the analytics firm every two weeks.
What this group of greens seek is the ability to block narratives they disagree with. “There are technically ways the platforms can stop dangerous disinformation from going viral,” stated one of the coalition leaders. “Does it require regulator action or legislation to further spur that on? I think that’s the conversation for this next year.”
Greens Track Deniers Ahead of Biden Climate Push (Subscription) | E & E News
DeSmogBlog https://www.desmogblog.com/global-warming-denier-database
