May 2, 2012

Managing the Masses through Global Standards

"...though the ISO 14000 standards are only now being implemented, it is fair to assume that they will evolve further...."[13]
Reinventing the World, Part 3       
   Managing the Masses through Global Standards
                            By Berit Kjos - 2001
           Part 1: Seamless Systems - the global framework for managing everyone 
           Part 2: The Process - molding minds through group consensus 

Relevant pages:
Remember the Communitarian THREE-LEGGED STOOL: A mandatory partnership between the public sector (government), private sector  (business), and social sector (community, churches, etc.) -- managed through Global Standards and laws established by national and international governments. This Communitarian system is fast leading the masses into a web of control involving food, [mental] health, beliefs, values, lifestyles, etc.

We are told that globalization calls for accountability and that accountability demands uniform, universal standards. That sounds reasonable, doesn't it?  But what about standardized people? Or standardized beliefs and values?
Like it or not, such standards are here. A massive network of "Quality" Management Systems (TQM) have been weaving a web of control around the world. Each organization within this global network must assess and monitor the compliance of the people within its own sphere. And those personal assessments will be based on global standards for the envisioned 21st century citizen. 
There is nothing inherently wrong with standards. But when global managers set standards designed to measure and monitor what they define as "cooperation," tolerance and beliefs, they undermine the rights guaranteed by our U.S. Constitution. And if our personal values must conform to the new global vision, the "land of the free" will cease to exist.[1]
Strange as it seems, today's international standards are designed to mold "quality" people as well as "quality" products. Aimed at standardizing human resources for the global workforce and "sustainable communities,"[2] they will be enforced through a variety of incentives and disincentives, both social and financial. Non-compliance will be costly.
Marc Tucker, director of the National Center on Education and the Economy (NCEE) and the master-mind behind today's partnership between schools and labor, has exposed some of the goals and incentives needed to enforce such standards. He suggests "breaking the current system, root and branch"[3] by orchestrating a radical "change in the prevailing culture -- the attitudes, values, norms, and accepted ways of doing things."[4]  In a jubilant 1992 post-election letter to Hillary Clinton, he described his vision of the new cradle-to-grave education system:
"What is essential is that we create a seamless web of opportunities to develop one's skills that literally extends from cradle to grave.... in which curriculum, pedagogy, examinations, and teacher education and licensure systems are all linked to the national standards... a system that rewards students who meet the national standard with further education and good jobs....”[5]
The United Nations has already set many of the standards. For example, the new standards for "mental health" designed to guide the attitudes, values and thinking processes of people around the world flow from the UN's World Health Organization (WHO) to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), then to the individual states and local agencies across the country. Likewise, today's education standards -- which have traded academics for socialization and specific work skills -- flow from UNESCO and federal agencies to your state and local school system, making a mockery of the pleasing promises of "local control."[6] [See The International Agenda and Silencing the Opposition]
Like Marc Tucker, former DHHS Secretary Donna Shalala envisioned a "seamless" system that would manage the planned change.[7] Small wonder, since the two departments -- education and health -- serve the same global goal. Nationally as well as globally, the standards for "lifelong learning" and "mental health" complement each other. Both are vital to the "seamless" system which would coordinate and monitor global transformation.
But it gets more complicated. A few years ago, I visited the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) in Winnipeg, Canada, where I picked up a little book called Global Green Standards: ISO 14000 and Sustainable Development. Well aware that "sustainable development" refers to the three E's of social transformation -- Environment, Economy and Equity -- not just to environmental protection, I wondered how such standards could affect ordinary people. Would the Geneva-based International Standardization Organization (ISO) use its "Green Standards" to control human resources and mandate "sustainable" lifestyles around the world?
In language typical among UN-related organizations, the IISD manual promised that its global standards would be "voluntary." But - 
"This is not to say that an organization may not 'require' its suppliers to meet these environmental management system standards, thus creating a de facto requirement. However, such a market-based requirement is still considered 'voluntary'."
"Although all ISO standards are developed as voluntary standards, many are eventually cited in legislation."

"This overlap between voluntary standards and regulations means that they cannot be considered as mutually exclusive."[8]
Most people appreciate standards that regulate local pollution. But we had better be alert to standards that would regulate human values and economic freedom. Global Green Standards tells us that "the sustainability trilogy of economic, social and environmental issues" includes issues such as "improving the distribution of income and wealth."[9] That may sound noble, but history has shown that such socialist or communist attempts at central planning bring all but the ruling elite down to the lowest common denominator.  It continues,
"Companies routinely make decisions about issues of race, gender, health, safety.... They deal with livelihoods, human welfare, equity, quality of life.... A management system that incorporates sustainable development principles would begin to integrate all of these issues."[10] Emphasis added.
This goal shows only the tip of the iceberg. A major function of the integrated "quality management" system is to direct "continual change," and our global managers don't tell us their ultimate plans.  Global Green Standards offers only a clue:
"Even though the ISO 14000 standards are only now being implemented, it is fair to assume that they will evolve further, to address the sustainability issues mentioned above."[11] Emphasis added.
In the United States, this emerging government of global standards and regulations makes an end-run around our Constitution. But how many Americans care?  Idealized through media propaganda, many of the new intrusive regulations are established as law through ambiguous and open-ended legislation, executive orders, federal regulations, activist courts, international treaties and a vast network of partnerships between governmental and non-governmental organizations (NGOs).[12]
Its tangled web is locked to a process that no longer permits the luxury of individual thinking, contrary facts, ideological conflicts or Biblical absolutes. Yet this process is so subtle -- so appealing to our sense of compassion and desire for unity -- that few notice its threats to personal freedom. 
You may not have noticed it in your workplace. Not all corporations or agencies are part of this system, though many become unwilling partners when swallowed up by larger companies.  Others -- unlike most government agencies and transnational corporations -- can't afford the consultants and labor needed for the ongoing training, assessments, monitoring and reporting so vital to "continual change."  
Even churches support this global revolution.[13] The lure of "church growth" and community partnerships have opened their doors to global management  gurus such as Peter Drucker and Steven Covey.  They may not identify with ISO 14000, but they are embracing the new social standards and disciplining members who refuse to conform. [See Re-Inventing the Church]
Naturally, the acceptance of this mind-changing process and its evolving standards block the return to Biblical faith. Assessed strengths and global values become the criteria for ministry, not God's guidelines. His promised strength in our human weakness becomes irrelevant. As Peter Drucker tells pastors,
“The pastor, as manager, has to identify their strengths and specialization, place them and equip them for service, and enable them to work in the harmonious and productive whole known as the body of Christ.”[14]
But the true "body of Christ" doesn't fit the world's pattern. Our God doesn't need the strong and proficient to accomplish His work. Instead, He "has chosen the foolish things of the world to put to shame the wise, and... the weak things of the world to put to shame the things which are mighty... that no flesh should glory in His presence." 1 Corinthians 1:27-29
No matter how narrow the way or inadequate our strength, those who trust Him and follow His ways can count on His sufficiency. When we conform to His unchanging truth, instead of the world's shifting standards,[15] we may face the wrath of today's "quality" managers. We may face exclusion and loss in a world that shows zero tolerance for non-compliance.
But it won't matter, for He has shown us the better way.  As He promised the apostle Paul long ago, He now assures us: “My grace is sufficient for you, for My strength is made perfect in weakness."
"Therefore most gladly I will rather boast in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me. Therefore I take pleasure in infirmities, in reproaches, in needs, in persecutions, in distresses, for Christ’s sake. For when I am weak, then I am strong." 2 Corinthians 12:9-10

3. Marc Tucker, "How We Plan to Do It," Proposal to the New American School Development Corporation, National Center for Education and the Economy, July 9, 1992.
4 Ibid.
5. A 1992 letter from Marc Tucker (sitting in David Rockefeller's office) to Hillary Clinton explaining the School-to-Work  system now being implemented across America and around the world.
6. See Silencing the Opposition and find "local control."
7. Donna Shalala: This link is now obsolete, but we downloaded a copy of her speech.
8. Global Green Standards (Winnipeg: International Institute for Sustainable Development, 1996), pages 2, 11, 13-14. This book can be downloaded as a PDF file from
9. Ibid., pages 85-86.

10. Ibid., page 90.
11. Ibid., page 93.

14. "The Business of the Kingdom," Christianity Today. Volume 43, No. 13, November 15, 1999.   Cited by Robert E. Klenck, "What's Wrong with the 21st Century Church?" at
17. "And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God."  Romans 12:2

No comments: