Impact of UN's "Agenda 2030" and Globalism on Americans' Freedom and Constitutional Rights
![]() |
Jon Schrock on Impact of UN's Agenda 2030 |
By John Fisher
Jon Schrock, National Coordinator for the John Birch Society (JBS), recently presented an analysis linking environmental policies, state sovereignty, and individual freedoms within the context of the UN’s Agenda 2030. This global initiative aims to address poverty, climate change, and sustainable development at the same time taking away American sovereignty and freedoms. Schrock argues that the Agenda’s goals of urbanization and decarbonization risk reducing individual autonomy in the U.S. by imposing international policies that could shift land use away from agriculture and toward industrial-scale renewable energy projects.
Environmental Policies, Carbon Capture, and Agriculture
Schrock scrutinized the redirection of over 50 million acres from agriculture to renewable energy and carbon sequestration projects, particularly solar farms and carbon capture initiatives, under Agenda 2030. He pointed to the impact on agricultural states like Indiana, Illinois, and Iowa, which provide essential crops and livestock, warning that Agenda 2030’s sustainability goals will compromise food security. The UN’s emphasis on zero-carbon goals, he says, is pushing states toward large-scale renewable projects, often enforced through eminent domain and shifting rural land use toward what he calls “solar industrial parks.”
He also raised concerns about the use of carbon capture and storage (CCS) in geological formations like Indiana’s Mount Simon Sandstone, where supercritical CO2 injections could create carbonic acid, potentially eroding sandstone and contaminating freshwater sources like the Tay’s River Aquifer. This, he argues, threatens both water resources and farmland, presenting an unintended consequence of sustainability initiatives under Agenda 2030.
Agenda 2030’s Urbanization and Land Use Goals
According to Schrock, Agenda 2030 advocates for “mass urbanization” and “sustainable cities,” which he interprets as a move toward compact, high-density housing—referred to as “15-minute cities”—that co-locate living, work, and amenities within close proximity. In Indiana, Schrock cited ongoing projects like the LEAP Project, which plans high-rise housing developments aimed at reducing carbon footprints by creating communities where residents can work and access essential services within minutes. Schrock expressed concern that this urbanization model may restrict individual housing choices and reduce farmland, impacting local economies.
Schrock also noted that such high-density housing plans require extensive water resources. The LEAP Project, for instance, requires 100 million gallons daily from Indiana’s Tay’s River Aquifer, which Schrock argues could deplete local resources, particularly as the project expands. He connected these developments to broader Agenda 2030 goals that he says prioritize sustainability over traditional lifestyles and potentially concentrate populations in urban centers, increasing dependence on government-controlled resources.
Foreign Ownership, Globalization, and National Sovereignty
Schrock pointed out another layer of complexity—foreign ownership of American agricultural land. He highlighted that foreign entities, including corporations linked to foreign governments, own significant portions of American farmland. In particular, he cited 2023 reports of acquisitions by Chinese entities in the Midwest. For Schrock, such acquisitions risk national sovereignty and food security, as foreign influence in agriculture could shift production priorities away from U.S. interests.
Connecting this to Agenda 2030, he argued that foreign-owned land within the U.S. could align with international sustainability goals, emphasizing exports over domestic food security. This, Schrock suggested, is a symptom of globalization encouraged by initiatives like Agenda 2030, potentially reducing U.S. control over its resources and aligning national policy with global agendas.
Constitutional Concerns: State Sovereignty and Federal Overreach
Schrock’s critique of Agenda 2030 is also rooted in constitutional principles, particularly the Tenth Amendment, which reserves powers to states that are not delegated to the federal government. He discussed Montana’s recent gun control nullification bill as an example of states pushing back against federal overreach, a trend he sees as necessary to counter global policies being integrated into U.S. law without proper legislative approval.
Agenda 2030’s goals for “clean energy” and “climate action,” he argued, have led to a complex regulatory environment in the U.S., where states are required to meet federal environmental standards not authorized by the Constitution. Schrock believes such mandates exceed federal authority, asserting that state governments should control environmental policies within their borders rather than adhering to international standards set by the United Nations.
Public Health Mandates and Election Integrity
Beyond environmental issues, Schrock addressed broader concerns related to public health mandates and election integrity. Reflecting on COVID-19 policies, he recalled how JBS had previously cautioned about potential mandates such as requiring vaccination cards that control shopping and restrict travel, which were initially dismissed but later implemented. He views such mandates as another example of government overreach, which he ties back to Agenda 2030’s emphasis on health and social equity.
Election integrity is another area of concern, as Schrock questions the transparency and accuracy of voter registration processes. He cited past JBS publications that anticipated voter fraud issues, suggesting that global pressures may influence national policies regarding election processes and data transparency. For Schrock, an informed electorate is essential to maintaining democratic integrity, and he advocates for voter education as a defense against both domestic and international influences on U.S. elections.
Educating and Engaging Citizens
Schrock’s presentation emphasized the importance of public awareness in countering the effects of Agenda 2030. He suggests that organizations like the John Birch Society are crucial for educating Americans about their rights and encouraging grassroots activism. To achieve this, JBS has established a coordinated network of field leaders who disseminate information and foster local engagement. Schrock argues that such education is essential to maintaining a free society, especially as policies from Agenda 2030 and similar initiatives continue to shape local and federal policies.
Conclusion: Preserving Constitutional Values Amid Global Change
Jon Schrock’s analysis calls for a balance between innovation and respect for foundational American principles. He argues that while sustainable development and environmental protection are important, they must not undermine constitutional rights or impose restrictive international policies that affect individual freedoms, state sovereignty, and local economies. Schrock concludes that Americans must remain vigilant and informed, advocating for policies that prioritize U.S. interests within the framework of the U.S. Constitution rather than yielding to the influence of global agendas like Agenda 2030.
By emphasizing transparency, education, and local empowerment, Schrock encourages Americans to consider the implications of global policies on national sovereignty and personal freedom, underscoring the importance of an engaged electorate in preserving the values that define the United States.
Hashtags: #Agenda2030 #SustainableDevelopment #StateRights #EnvironmentalPolicy #JohnBirchSociety