The New World Order refers to a powerful elite that is
conspiring to rule the world through an authoritarian
government that would replace sovereign
nations. An all-encompassing cabal which purpose is the establishment of a new
world order as the natural progression of history. It involves many influential
figures who operate through front organizations and orchestrate significant
political and economic events, manipulating trade, public opinion and
international conflicts in an ongoing efforts to achieve global domination. The
New World Order has traditionally been associated with International Financiers,
Zionist and secret societies like Illuminati, Freemasons, the Committee of 300
and Bilderberg Group.
After World War II the
conspiratorial groups allegedly seized the opportunity to implement the agenda
of globalization as a collective effort to address problems that were “beyond
the capacity of individual nations”. The initiative led to the formation of
international organizations such as the UN in 1945
and NATO in 1949
and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade GATT in
1947 which regulated cooperation in order to achieve a peaceful transition into
the new liberal order. These organization were generally opposed by American conservatives and
economic nationalists. Progressives on the other hand welcomed these new
international organization although they sustained that the regime lacked the
means to achieve real global justice and equality. Activists form around the world
formed a federalist movement hoping to create a real
world government but never had any success.
Between 1947 and 1957 the threat of a
bureaucratic world government known as the “Red Menace” became the focal point
of apocalyptic conspiracy. But by 1960 many on the right were promoting the
idea that the governments of the United States and the Soviet Union were
both controlled by a group of Bankers and corporate
internationalists who intended to use these international
organizations as a vehicle to bring about the world government, which fueled a
campaign for the United State to withdraw from the United Nations. After the fall of communism in 1989 the Red Menace
shifted to a new form of liberal collectivism and supranationalism as the main
proponents of a New World Order. Contributing to the shift was a right-wing opposition to corporate internationalism, as the
left embraces the globalization process true to the historical paradigm and attempts
to disproof the right, defining the new frontlines
between globalist and conservatives, international financiers and industrialist
nationalists.
In 1966 Mary M. Davison published The
Profound Revolution, a manifesto of sorts suggesting that the New World Order
hides in plain sight and describing how real-life institutions like the Federal
Reserve, the Council on Foreign Relations, and the U.S. government operate as
fronts for the “international banker” shadow Establishment. Conservative commentator Gary Allen publishes
None Dare Call It Conspiracy in 1972 in which he explains the paranoia in the
context of deficit spending and basic banking, offering also tales of how the
Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission carry forth the
economic agenda of an invisible global power.
The Birch Society true to its natural
instincts and anticommunist stand saw the menace of an autocratic world
government in the Civil Rights movement. Their objection is becomes obvious in
an advertisement in the October 31, 1965 issue of the Palm Beach Post titled, “The John Birch Society Asks: What’s
Wrong With Civil Rights?” The
half-page advertisement begins with the statement that nothing is wrong with
civil rights, just with the Civil Rights Movement. According to the JBS,
it constituted a communist plot to build a Black Soviet Republic in the United
States. They also express the opinion that black people were being manipulate
and the Civil Rights Movement was inspired by anticolonialism sentiments in
Africa and Asia, although “they enjoyed a far better quality of life than
ninety percent of people in the world”.
During the late 1950s and 1960s the world was
convulsing with wars of liberation between colonial white regimes and Asian and
African nationalist insurgents especially. Kenya and Algeria experienced
uprisings that led to the regimes the British and French regimes to grant their
independence in the early 1960s. Fascist Portugal fought African nationalist
insurgencies in Angola, Mozambique, and Guinea-Bissau, during the 1960s and
early 1970s which led to a military coup in Lisbon in 1974 and a sudden
withdrawal from Africa. In white settler ruled Southern Rhodesia (today’s
Zimbabwe), South African occupied South West Africa (today’s Namibia), and
apartheid South Africa, African nationalists became frustrated with
increasingly deadly state repression and abandoned non-violent protest in the
1960s to embark on armed struggles to liberate their countries. Given the Cold
War context of the time, the colonial states portrayed themselves as champions
of Western civilization and appealed to Britain and the United States for
assistance and the African nationalists received support from the Eastern Bloc
which required them to adopt the socialist rhetoric. Newly independent
countries, such as Tanzania and Zambia, were often sympathetic to the armed
nationalist movements and allowed them to establish staging areas in their
territories which meant that these states were often drawn into the conflicts
as well.
When president John F Kennedy was assassinated
on November 22, 1963, it shook a country that was already concerned with the
Cold War and the threat of a nuclear war as well as the growing conflict in the
Viet Nam peninsula. This helped generate a sort of euphoric mood and triggered the
events that culminated in the signing of the Civil Rights Bill by Kennedy’s
successor Lyndon Johnson. Pres. Johnson stated in his
first address to a joint session of Congress, “No
memorial oration or eulogy could more eloquently honor President Kennedy’s
memory than the earliest possible passage of the civil rights bill for which he
fought so long.”
The Powers to enforce the Civil Rights Act were
weak in a beginning but were later supplemented using Congress to assert its
authority under different parts of the constitution, like its power to regulate
interstate commerce, guarantee equal protection under the law, and protect
voting rights. Although the bill included provisions to ban discrimination in
public accommodations and enabled the U.S. Attorney General to join lawsuits against
state governments, civil rights activist considered that it didn’t go far
enough because it did not support provisions granting the power to initiate
desegregation actions against private entities.
One of the
arguments by the opponents of the Civil Rights Bill was essentially that is
would be used to bus children to achieve racial quotas
and force integration. They stated that one can’t legislate morality,
adding that it would violate individual rights and state freedoms specially. Proponents of the bill guaranteed that it
would not authorize such measures, urging the sponsor of the bill Senator Hubert Humphrey
to write two amendments to outlaw busing. He said, “if the bill were to compel
it, it would be a violation of the Constitution, because it would be handling
the matter on the basis of race”. Two
years later the Department of Health and Education said
that Southern school districts would be required to meet mathematical ratios of
students by busing.
It is never more obvious that these conflicts are both real
and negated by a Global environment setting up the chain reaction between the
left and the right, a capacity and demand that alternate places. The Civil
Rights Bill ended up being the New Gospel and integrating the environment into
one of the most liberal concepts of collectivism yet, a conjugation of
liberation wars, political resentment, racial conflicts, communist ideology,
and religious impetus.
Immanentize
the eschaton has been translated as “to bring about the final stage of
history”, a heaven on earth like utopia related to Millennialism and the coming
of a gnostic antichrist. It has also been translated as immanentize the
emancipation, although the catholic church sustains has rejected all forms of
“secular” messianism as well as millennial falsifications. Millennialism is the
belief in the end of time through some apocalyptic even, the reconciliation of
God’s goodness with the existence of evil in the world.
In his
speech “I Have a Dream” Martin Luther King expresses the indelible utopia which
was weaponized regardless of what you think of the idea.
“I say to you today, my friends, so even though we face the
difficulties of today and tomorrow, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply
rooted in the American dream.
I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out
the true meaning of its creed: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that
all men are created equal.
I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state
sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of oppression,
will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice.…
I have a dream that one day down in Alabama, with its vicious
racists, . . . one day right there in Alabama little black boys and black girls
will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters
and brothers. I have a dream today.
I have a dream that one day every valley shall be exalted, every
hill and mountain shall be made low, the rough places will be made plain, and
the crooked places will be made straight, and the glory of the Lord shall be
revealed, and all flesh shall see it together.
This is our hope. . . With this faith we will be able to hew out
of the mountain of despair a stone of hope. With this faith we will be able to
transform the jangling discords of our nation into a beautiful symphony of
brotherhood. With this faith we will be able to work together, to pray
together, to struggle together, to go to jail together, to stand up for freedom
together, knowing that we will be free one day. . . .
And when this happens, and when we allow freedom ring, when we let
it ring from every village and every hamlet, from every state and every city,
we will be able to speed up that day when all of God’s children, black men and
white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join
hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual: “Free at last! Free at
last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last!”
This is
the right principle but it just doesn’t work like that, humans come together on
cultural levels. This kind of integration depends on socioeconomic
relationships that usually take place over hundreds of years, especially
throughout such a vast expanse of land, regardless of faith and the absolutive concept
of one humanity (which obviously play a role). This approach ends up producing idiosyncratic
conflicts and apocalyptic dynamics. The most noble concept can be commoditized to
create the moral doctrine and generate the “enrichment” with incredible
repressive potential…if we don’t understand humans moral and political essence.
I’m not questioning our capacity to come together by the intentional
weaponization of the concept.
