New World Order, fact or fiction?

Steven Hansen.

(Publisher and Co-founder of Econintersect, is an international business and industrial consultant specializing in turning around troubled business units; consults to governments to optimize process flows; and provides economic indicator analysis based on unadjusted data and process limitations.)

“The concept of the balance of power in international relations is closely linked with N.W.O. (geopolitics). Whatever one can tell about decreasing of the role of the Power in the international relations, the events of previous history clearly testify it.

Any territorial disintegration, substantial changes of national borders, creation of new states, alliances or coalitions, integration and disintegration processes – all this lead to big or small changes on the world political map. Such changes cannot turn, but lead to the changes of national interests and priorities in the policy of states, forced to adapt themselves to new geopolitical  conditions and new distribution of forces in the system of international relations.

In this respect a typical picture of such changes is represented in the world which followed the disintegration of the Soviet Union and the system of socialism, unification of Germany and building new states in the territories of former Soviet Union. One of the main consequences of these changes was the destruction of the previous bipolar system of international relations, which in one way or another used to keep the world balanced, not letting it slide into a WWIII. I believe that moral or taste categories would hardly be appropriate in understanding of world order phenomena. We may find enough arguments in favor of its positive impact rather than negative one.

In my view, bipolar balance of power was created due to quite definite objective circumstances, which emerged after the end of WWII. It also ceased its existence due to the objective circumstances, which were directly linked with the disintegration of the Soviet Union. That process led to the formation of a new system of balance and international relations as the whole.

Today, many experts try to describe the current World Order or NWO either as “unipolar” or (more often as “multipolar”). The first definition is based on that the only superpower existing in the world as the United States, ensuring all the rest by the key elements of its Hard Power. The second definition stems from the fact that the collapse of bi-polarity has put the states that previously stood somehow in the backyard into an almost equal political situation.

I believe that both evaluations are not quite adequate. As regards the first evaluation, then a “unipolar” world cannot simply exist either in a physical or political world.  The notions themselves “pole”, “polarity” envisage the existence of opposing objects or subjects. The second evaluation is based on the formal provision about equality of states and just as illusion on common values and interests.

On the whole I believe that the NWO after the disintegration of bipolarity is neither “unipolar” nor “multipolar”. It is so far in the phase of its coming into being and has not yet received some larger or lesser extent of registration, and therefore final evaluations and labels are applicable to it to a small degree. It may take a good deal of time before to judge about its genuine essence and about the form that it will assume. Today, in the world, there is only one superpower existing, but, in my view, one should not draw a conclusion that it exerts simultaneously a decisive impact on the development of international relations on the whole.

The events in Iraq/Syria, Sahel, Afghanistan or total disorder in Libya or Saudi-Yemeni crisis have shown one thing: USA is capable to influence or even change the regime in any part of the World, but cannot achieve its goals and channel the development of international relations in a desired direction. America is opposed not by a certain equal force as it was before, but by a certain international disorder, a chaos, a kind of anarchy, which cannot be controlled, regulated and managed by itself in principle. Rise of IS in cross-border areas of Iraq and Syria or Ansar Allah better known as Houthis in Yemen are good symptoms of such negative impact.

In this sense the bipolar system was more orderly, more controllable, and therefore, more predictable rule of the game and which impossible to extrapolate to the current situation in the World. It is therefore no accident that after the disintegration of the Soviet Union some experts believed that the United States will not face confrontation to the monolithic Soviet threat. Hardest task would be confronting further destabilization its former territories by the worst scenarios in such painful parts as Ukraine, Abkhazia, Dagestan, Karabah or some regions of Central Asia, because managing chaos is simply impossible.

We may say that the previous World Order or global bipolar balance of power has disintegrated, clearing the way for many regional balances of power, which unlike the first one are unstable, changing and fraught with unpredictable conflicts. If we try to name current system of World Order as multipolar, than it can be seen in a form of loosely linked regional imbalances, which does not merge into a single global balance of power. In this sense the United States may look like a Pastor whose herd runs away in different direction.

No matter what is the present layout of powers in the system of international relations or how to assess it if the very principle of balance of power not preserved, just like geopolitics and national interests because all these categories are a natural and regular basis of sovereign states interaction. Any individual state, being a relatively independent unit and if it does not meet any obstacles, strives toward expanding its influence and power over the maximum territory. However, obstacles are bound to appear on the way to expansion, first of all in the person of other states, striving not to allow the increase of strength and might of the neighbors, especially at their expense.

The result of this is collision of various interests and goals, in which force plays a decisive role. If the power of one state is too big as compared with the power of any other states, then the latter strive to balance the power of the first one by concluding alliances and forming coalitions. In its elementary form the principle of the balance of power, thus, serves not so much as to maintain peace and contribute to international mutual understanding, but rather to ensure security of states and their sovereignty by way of prevention of the growth of might of any of them until those limits when it begins to threaten the national interests of the rest.

The entire history of international relations provides evidence that the inability to understand the action of the principle of the balance of power, neglecting it and refusal to take it into account in foreign policy practice of the state may result in the unforeseen and often dire consequences for it. The desire to replace it with such abstract moral principles as the “balance of power”, the “priority of common human values” or simply personal friendly relations between the leaders of the states will inevitably end in failure and practical surrender of the national interests of the state, which are directly linked with the balance of  power. Mikhail Gorbachev’s and Boris Yeltsin’s policy are a convincing example of this.

The balance of power as basis of World Order phenomena is important not only for the elaboration of priorities of the policy, its goal and means, but also for the evaluation of prospects of development of international relations on the whole and in some of its individual part, without which a realistic policy is unthinkable. It is especially important in our time, taking into account the growing interdependence of states, the destructive nature of modern weapons and those changes that take place in parts of the globe.

The World Order, geopolitical equilibrium, the balance of power and national interests – all of this is not theoretical abstraction, but reality, with which each state has to deal and take them into account in its politics.”

Mr. Aqab Malik. 

( He is currently an Assistant Professor and sole remaining founding member of the Department of Strategic and Nuclear Studies as the National Defence University, Islamabad.)

“In my estimation, we have no choice in the matter.

Yes, the world is currently, and has been in the past, thoroughly divided, where the possibility of unity has never been possible. For example, competing interests for the acquisition of resources and power have been at the heart of the expansion of empires since the beginnings of human civilisation. These were an extension of our tribal past. Since the arrival of the expansion of major religions, such as the dominant religions of today, and others before them that have disappeared into the Pages of antiquity, ideas were rarely fought over. This would suggest that there has been a form of progress in the development of our species.

Nevertheless, this does not negate the importance of the competition for resources. Upon the introduction of the period of enlightenment and Renaissance, the world returned to the exploitation of man by man for the acquisition of resources during the colonisation of Asia, Africa, and the Americas by the Europeans who had lifted themselves out of intellectual slumber during their dark ages and the dominance of religion.

It was only during the Inter-war period in the twentieth century that ideas surfaced again as the main element that justified the competition for resources through ideological orientation, and hence, conflict.  Initially, National Socialism came into conflict with liberalism within the capitalist paradigm, after which the conflict of systems between capitalism and communism took hold.

Again, we return to religious conflict. However, this is more a struggle from within Islam, such as the hundred years war between competing interpretations of Christianity, rather than a war between Islam and the rest of the world. Islam is in the throes of its own revision.

These wars are all a consequence of progress. Although, it may not seem as such.

During the past seventy years we have seen tremendous progress in human development through the creation of transnational organisations, such as the United Nations. In terms of historical time, there has been an exponential growth in human interaction, and exchange of ideas and resources. In fact, the global economic system prevailing today, given all its flaws, has brought us closer together than any other time in history.

The advent of the EU, ASEAN, SCO, GAAT, AU, and even the platform of SAARC, has begun to unite former enemies under the umbrella of mutual human development. Although, these are troubling times, one must note the trend of many countries that are giving up aspects of their National sovereignty to acquire mutual economic benefits, which has begun to facilitate political unification in some areas of the world, such as Europe under the EU.

This is a step in the right direction. Countries form regional blocks, regional blocks may eventually form global blocks, sharing power for mutual benefits and gains….

3) Surprisingly in our day in age, a big percentage of people hold the N.W.O view as factual. Why are people absorbed by this idea?

Although a NWO does not exist, there is some form of global coordination, such as through the G7 and G20. However, this is limited to the economic dimension.  Nevertheless, the meetings for such organisations are highly publicised throughout the world to enable some form of coordination for the rapidly developing globalisation, and economic and political’ interconnectedness of the world.

The contention is not whether there is an evolution towards some form of NWO, but what that NWO entails and for the benefit of whom.

The general apprehension towards a potential NWO, therefore, concerns the type of system that may eventually evolve. It is therefore pertinent to enable the evolution of a system that is sustainable for the benefit of future generations, and not one that merely continues to exploit the massive structural disparities between the haves and the have nots.
What is disconcerting is that the current global economic system, which evolved from the blue prints of the period of colonial mercantilism that was fundamentally based upon the abusive exploitation of weaker nations, continues to utilise such strategies for the consolidation of the status quo that arose from the colonial period.

It is pertinent to realise that the world community is radically different from the time that the current system’s blue prints were devised several hundred years ago.

4) I guess religion plays a big factor in unifying everyone. Bahai’s, Hindus, Shintos, Zoroastrians, Jews, Manicheans, Catholics, Mormons, Christians, Buddhist, Muslims {…} all unifying into one new religion seems more like a Peter Pan story. Will we ever see The Roman Catholic Church, holding hands with ISIS leaders, cheering up the masses?

– Do you believe religious cults have infiltrated the government to achieve such goal (This is the popular view)?

Over the millennia, ideas arose to facilitate a degree of mutual Co-existence between disparate peoples in different regions of the world. Essentially, the goal or Vision of these ideas, or religions, were locally constructed according to local and regional conditions and the prevalent ideas or cultural traits of those temporal periods.

My question is:

Is it possible,  or is it feasible to implement the ideas or systems of existence that arose hundreds or thousands of years ago in the present or rapidly changing future,  which have fundamentally different globally evolving socio-cultural, political,  economic, technological, structural dynamics?

Implementing such absolutist ideas, which are inherently conflictual, is a recipe for disaster. As is the case for the present advocacy of one or other metaphysical ideas over another. Each holds that it is the perfect model,  and cannot consider any other system of life as it’s equal, and therefore,  is inevitably designed to continually conflict with another,  or all others.

What one realises, therefore, is that a global, and maybe even Trans-global, socio-political and economic system that has at its heart an intrinsic design to maintain sustainable, yet competitive, development without the exploitation of the present and future masses by a Small oligarchy.

5) New World Order supporters mention a one world currency. What would it take for a one world currency to happen? Can you give me two brief advantages and disadvantages in how a world currency would affect our planet?

We are looking at an inevitable, but neutral, global common currency in the future. I have no doubts about that. Ideally, it must be designed through global consensus. However, it is more likely that the global currency will evolve out of the economic competition between the strongest economic powers. What power wins this global market competition is anyone’s guess at this moment. Nevertheless, the competition is currently gaining pace.

One aspect that has to be fulfilled, however, is that the global economic leaders must peacefully Co-opt the medium and smaller economies into the common currency through incentives and mutual benefits. Much as has occurred for the common currency amongst the members of the European Union, the Euro.

Advantages:

Complete dissolution of currency disparities.

Standardization of commercial markets.

Access to locally, regionally, and globally diverse markets without immense discrepancies in prices.

Disadvantages:

Instability in one market area may lead to susceptibility in many other sectors throughout the world.

If the currency is not regulated correctly, with loopholes, it may be exploited for nefarious goals by parties in opposition to the global currency. Therefore, a bulwark organisational structure that is truly diverse in its membership with fewer disparities of interests is absolutely essential.

Conclusion:

Although the above is a valid proposition, it must be noted that such a globally acceptable governance structure will not evolve and develop in a vacuum. Countless obstacles will present themselves in opposition to such an eventuality. No less in significance are the prevalence of absolutist, binary, and exclusive ideologies and interest groups.

The economic interconnectedness of the world will essentially become a reality well before political, religious, and other ideational interests coalesce to form a global government. It’s a long road, but it is an inevitable goal. This is especially so because technology is exponentially driving humanity towards such an inevitability. And more so, because humanity is on the brink of a singularity towards a Transhuman world. That is, a world which begins to improve itself exponentially. Where we may exist beyond humanity.”

“In a joint session of Congress on 11 September 1990, President George H.W. Bush proclaimed the birth of the “New World Order”. This is a concept President Woodrow Wilson (1913-1921) had introduced in connection with his multilateral approach to foreign policy in the aftermath of the First World War as embodied in the Fourteen Points and the League of Nations covenant. Wilson’s multilateralism – as opposed to unilateralism embodied in the doctrine of isolationism pursued until his administration – was an admission that the US can only solve large balance of power issues in the world through a multilateral involvement because that would achieve the best results and benefit US interests.

US foreign policy assumptions imbedded in Bush’s view of the New World Order (NWO) were diametrically opposite to Wilsonian internationalism. Of course, the global power structure was very different in 1990 than in 1918. However, the tools of statecraft are the same and the multipolar balance of power comparable.  In outlining US post-Cold War goals and modalities, Bush made the following statement about how the New World Order (NWO) would usher in a new era of justice, freedom and democracy for the entire world.

“A world in which there is the very real prospect of a new world order. In the words of Winston Churchill, a “world order” in which “the principles of justice and fair play … protect the weak against the strong …” A world where the United Nations, freed from cold war stalemate, is poised to fulfill the historic vision of its founders. A world in which freedom and respect for human rights find a home among all nations.”

If instead of making the sweeping messianic statements about the NWO, Bush had simply said that this means US-style capitalism under globalization and neoliberal policies will triumph across the entire world because there is no model of a political economy other than the one of US-style capitalism, then he would have told the absolute truth to the world. However, he chose to make vacuous rhetorical statements that were intended solely for domestic mass consumption and to induce global mass conformity to globalization and neoliberal policies that he apparently equated with human rights, justice, freedom, etc.

One could argue that in the midst of euphoric celebrations over the crash of the Soviet bloc, the US political class along with the media, businesses, and even most academics who should have known better chose to make sweeping pronouncements about the teleological nature of the end of the Cold War, as though Jesus Christ had just returned to preside over humanity’s eternal salvation. The ultimate goal for making such grandiose statements was to project an image to the world that the US won the Cold War and remains the only military, economic, political and cultural superpower – hyperpuissance par excellence. At the same time, the goal was to convince the American people that such a grand victory also constitutes a victory for domestic institutions no matter the plight of the poor, the declining middle class in the Western World and deterioration of public education, and the growing gap between poor and rich on the planet.

Has there been greater “freedom and respect for human rights” in the US, or has democracy fallen victim to the US-led “war on terror”, which replaced the Cold War? What does the US Senate Intelligence report of 2015 tell us about US and human rights justified by the “culture of counterterrorism”? What is the record of the US with regard to “protecting the weak from the strong”?  And what about civil rights and glaring violations that have forced cities like Chicago to pay out millions to victims?

Is the world safer now because of the end of the East-West confrontation, is it freer and more tolerant since 1990, as Bush promised that it would be when he delivered the NWO speech? Has capitalism delivered fair play and justice to the masses throughout the world, as Bush insisted would be the case? Has the political economy of the NWO protected the weak from the strong as he promised, or do we continue to have unemployed inner city black youth shot down by police, occupied Palestinians killed in Gaza by Israeli gunfire while the US remains deferential to Tel Aviv’s policies? Has militarism decreased in the last 25 years, have regional conflicts evaporated, have nuclear weapons been banned and the world is now safer than ever? On the contrary, we have seen a rise in world defense spending, many countries doubling their expenditures between 2000 and 2014.

US military solutions in foreign affairs go largely unchecked as do covert operations that are part of a destabilizing policy in a number of countries from the former Soviet republics (Ukraine) to Latin America (Venezuela, Peru, Ecuador and Argentina most notably), Syria to Pakistan.  The US has not renounced military solutions to political crises and in fact it has been creating new crises, directly and indirectly at times collaborating with what it labels “terrorists” in Libya and Syria to bring about regime change and then fighting against the same terrorists with whom it had collaborated.

The NWO simply means that the US is much freer than it had ever been to destabilize countries in order to integrate them militarily, politically and economically. The NWO has created a more unstable world, largely because the US and its NATO partners do not have a serious military rival to challenge their direct or covert interventions intended to deny the right to self determination in countries targeted for regime change. Violating national sovereignty in any form from political and military to economic is a form of aggressive intervention to impose hegemony.

The NWO is indeed a form of Pax Americana (US economic, political, and military hegemony) revived to reflect the absence of a military superpower rival that can effectively challenge the US role in the world.  Naturally, Pax Americana as it existed in 1950 is not possible today because the global power shift is moving increasingly toward Asia. In an acknowledgment of the twilight of Pax Americana, Henry Kissinger recently argued that the US needs to collaborate with China to “lead the world” (manage world affairs) together, another interpretation of the NWO to account for China’s power. Even this Metternichian early 19^th century concept of world affairs management under a new type of NWO implies the violation of national sovereignty of the weak by the strong, an imperialist concept that Kissinger has always embraced and modeled after Austrian foreign minister Klemens Wenzel von Metternich whose goal was to preserve the European balance of power and status quo in the post-Napoleonic era.

1.      Distrust of Government under the New World Order

One can easily understand the skepticism not only of the rest of the world about the US-centered NWO concept, but also of Americans, especially young people as we have seen in social networks.  According to various public opinion polls in the US and other countries, there is a segment of the public that believes the US and Israel were either behind the attacks on 9/11, or at the very least their intelligence services knew of the attacks ahead of time. I think conspiracy theories are ridiculous unless incontrovertible facts support such theories.

That a percentage of people accept conspiracy theories indicates as much of the irrational prevailing as a deep mistrust of public officials and the media. That people in Indonesia and Pakistan believe in conspiracy involving US role in 9/11 is somewhat understandable. That even a small segment of the American people shares the same view as Muslims is indicative of the profound skepticism that exists about the US government’s credibility. The level of skepticism seems to rise as time passes and it is correlated with age, as young people tend to disbelieve the US government.

We live in an age of public skepticism about the social contract’s inability to fulfill its obligations to citizens partly because the government violates the Constitution with regard to privacy (in 1928 the Court reviewed convictions obtained on the basis of evidence gained through taps on telephone wires in violation of state law. On a five–to– four vote, the Court held that wiretapping was not within the confines of the Fourth Amendment.) violations through illegal surveillance. If this is as a true in the US as mistrust is in Putin’s oligarchic-controlled Russia, people have lost confidence not just in public institutions but also private that influence public policy on behalf of the socioeconomic elites and at the expense of the middle class and workers. The erosion if not loss of public confidence in institutions is a very serious because it leads people to accept conspiracy theories, no matter how absurd.

Yielding to conspiracy theories is indicative that people feel helpless, especially to a conspiracy theory regarding the NWO that really appeals to people’s sense of utter dependence on forces overwhelmingly outside their control and far beyond their level of comprehension. Clearly, right-wing populists are exploiting such conspiracy theories and this is one reason that the French neo-Fascist party (Front National) of Marine Le Pen is actually on its way to become the dominant one in the country or at least number two. Similarly, there are right-wing ultra-nationalist, racist and xenophobic political parties or movements within political parties across the entire world, including the US Tea Party as an integral part of the GOP with deep links to the religious right that believes the NWO is a conspiracy by “unpatriotic” sinister forces.

NWO critics also include centrists and leftists that see the hegemonic power of a few hundred businesses and a few hundred super rich controlling most of the world’s wealth and influencing policies in every domain from foreign affairs where regional conflicts arise to minimum wage and social security benefits. NWO as a force of capitalism very different from the Jeffersonian model clearly signals to centrists and leftists that democracy is either in decline or failing altogether by giving way to an oligarchic system of rule. The inexorable link between increased global integration and inequality is something that many people attribute to the NWO, just as others insist that the erosion of democracy is the result of supra-national power corporations enjoy under the NWO.

Transformation policy originated during WWII when Breton Woods set the current global mechanisms to loosely manage the world economy with the goal on integrating it under the patron-client economic-political-military model. The NWO is a continuation of transformation policy and clearly the triumph of US-based capitalism against Soviet-based Communism. The old world order was the Cold War bipolar global power structure that had the world divided between East and West as manifested not only in the ideological struggle, but the nuclear arms race, the race for strategic minerals, energy and markets, the race for everything from winning the race to the moon to winning the race for influence in the world. After the fall of the Berlin Wall, the bipolar world gave way to the unipolar where the US dominates militarily and politically, but must share with other Great Powers the management of the world economy.

The fundamental structure of the capitalist world economy in the early 21^st century is not very different than it was in the early 20^th century when the Great Powers were competing for markets throughout the world to strengthen their national economies and benefit their national capitalist class and for military advantages.  The downfall of the USSR and the Chinese government decision to modernize the country under the capitalist system and through close global integration convinced many that indeed there is something new in the world order, when in fact the only “new” elements was geographic integration into the economic system of countries previously participating at a minimal level and under their own national policies not international rules of trade, investment, production, consumption and labor policies.

With the exception of the Soviet Bloc and China disengaging from the capitalist world economy, the tools of statecraft and capitalist system remained the same throughout the Cold War when the US created a global economic, political, and military network to strengthen and manage the Western bloc. The creation of the IMF, World Bank, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, the International Labor Organization, NATO, SEATO, and OAS were all part of a US-centered network to sustain the global system and ultimately bring down not just the rival Communist regimes around the world, but the non-aligned especially in Egypt under Gamal Abdel Nasser, Indonesia under Sukarno, Burma under Thankin Nu, Yugoslavia under Josip Tito, Ghana under Kwame Nkrumah, and India under Nehru. In other words, any country not well integrated into the US-based capitalist world order was targeted for regime change.   The non-aligned experiment was an affirmation of national sovereignty that was diametrically opposed to the integration model based on a patron-client model.

Besides the consolidation of the neoliberal model under globalization intended to preserve the geographic and socioeconomic inequality on a world scale, and besides the militarist component of the NWO as a core tool of statecraft, we have seen the culture of fear rise sharply around the world, especially in the US that has institutionalized the “war on terror” as permanent machinery at home and abroad.  If Bush had explained to the world in 1990 that the culture of fear would actually rise much higher than it ever was during the Cold when there was a nuclear war threat, how many people would have welcomed it as blindly as they did? The culture of fear by itself may sound innocuous enough but it is a method of sociopolitical conformity from which the public cannot escape because the mass media constantly hammers on it. Moreover, the culture of fear under the NWO has contributed to the deterioration of democracy as government has relied more on police and military often in flagrant violation of the constitution.

2) Obstacles to the New World Order: Terrorism and Russia or Pax Americana?

One could argue that the NWO does not work because Islamic terrorists, North Korea, Iran, Syria, Venezuela, and above all Putin’s Russia just will not allow for a peaceful world where Pax Americana may finally prevail with its patron-client integration model. After all, the US did not invite Islamic terrorism, it did not invite rogue states like North Korea to constantly agitate, and it did not invite Putin to become a hardened nationalist interested in reviving some of Russia’s lost glory from the Czarist era. How can the US by itself do anything about the NWO when there are states and rebel-terrorist movements that will not permit for the implementation of this new order?

It is true that we do have countries around the world trying to affirm their own policies unilaterally or through regional cooperation rather than conforming to a single world system like the NWO as the US conceives of it. We also have militant movements among the most prominent al-Qaeda and more recently ISIS challenging the status quo and regional balance of power. The question is not the existence of such militant movements and states affirming national policies running counter to the NWO, but how the US and its allies react to them in order to resolve conflict through political means or exacerbate the situation by seeking military solutions in order to preserve the declining Pax Americana.

One irony in the process of Pax Americana’s decline is that for decades it preserved itself by diminishing the national political, economic and military sovereignty of other countries over which it exerted inordinate influence. Yet, the American middle class and workers are now paying a heavy for the privilege of creating and maintaining its global role under the NWO. One of the reactions for the globalization process under US hegemony is nationalist reaction from other countries. Not just Russia, Venezuela, and Iran, but most countries resent having their national sovereignty compromised, unless their comprador political and economic elites are better off under the NWO. The perception that the US is using the cover of the NWO to remain the world’s hegemonic power and to weaken the political, economic and military sovereignty of other nations is much more evident in countries I mentioned above than in England, for example.

While the US sees rogue nationalist states and Islamic militants as obstacles to the NOW, many around the world see the NWO as a thin veil of Pax Americana and imperialist aggression invading their homeland if not with troops then through trade and investment that undermine national enterprises and weaken national capital in favor of international interests, through cultural imperialism that permeates everything from cinema, TV and music to shoe styles and way of a hedonistic lifestyle. How can the meaning of the NWO be the same to a New York banker as to a devout Muslim in rural Pakistan that sees the US as an invader in every sense from military to commercial?

3) A big percentage of people hold the N.W.O view as factual. Why are people absorbed by this idea? 

To the degree that people realize there is absolutely nothing they can do about the political economy, foreign and defense policy operating under the NWO, they become resigned to the idea. People feel just as powerless about reforming or abolishing the IMF that imposes austerity on debtor nations, the WTO that regulates trade in favor of the large companies and powerful nations, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the Paris Club (international consortium of creditor countries making large scale loans to governments), OPEC, etc.

People recognize that their own lives, those of their families and loved ones depend on conformity to the status quo. This is why politicians, journalists, consultants, academics, and especially business people will sing the praises of whatever government declares official policy, including the NWO. Besides, to actively and publicly oppose it in the age of counterterrorism means that the dissident is taking a big risk of labeled unpatriotic. The vast majority of the people, including journalists, politicians, businesspeople, and academics simply repeat the official line on the NOW. People rarely bother researching and analyzing this complex topic for themselves. However, even if they did, what benefit would they have criticizing it, any more than if they criticized any official policy? Besides fear and self interest, there is no alternative but to openly embrace the NWO that is synonymous with globalization and neoliberal policies business and government support. Although there are those who embrace NWO for ideological reasons, opportunism rather than ideology rules the day when it comes to the interests of individuals and organizations. Globalization is evident in what people wear, what they drive, mechanical devices they use on a daily basis, and the modern means of communication. In short, globalization is an integral part of culture and this means that the NWO is more real culturally than it is politically.

4) Religion and the New World Order: What is the role of religion and have religious cults infiltrated the government to achieve such goal?

Considering the bickering between the main religions of the world and the fact that different religions support different regimes, the idea that “religions have infiltrated governments” to create one world religion that reflects the NWO is rather absurd but popular with a segment of the population. Along the lines of NWO conspiracy promoters, Henry Makow, The Cruel Hoax: Feminism and the New World Order states that:  “Rockefeller and Rothschild created feminism to poison male-female relations (divide and conquer.) Their twin objectives are depopulation and totalitarian world government. Why? These bankers create money out of nothing and think they are God. “Cruel Hoax” shows the connection between feminism, Communism and 9-11. It examines male-female relations and shows how we can take back our heterosexuality.” This sort of right wing madness and populist propaganda actually has a wider audience than one might imagine. When we set aside the absurdities of this author, we must really wonder why the appeal to so many people, why are people so willing to accept on face value such blatant conspiracy theories.

The mystique of the NWO makes people with proclivities toward religion/spiritualism arrive at various conclusions, depending also on their secular ideological predisposition. For example, there are those who believe that all large mainstream religions are behind the NOW in order to create one world religion just as they wish to create a single world government and single world currency. As paranoid as it may sound, it may not be so illogical given that the large mainstream religions support the political economy. Despite their rhetorical claims about the poor, mainstream religions help to maintain the status quo by keeping people in conformity rather than rebelling to improve society.

The only improvement on which religions focus is the spiritual dimension and the other world, rather than social justice down here on earth where it matters. Throughout history religion has played a catalytic role in unifying people of the same faith but divide them between different faiths.  Moreover, religion has been a cause and justification for wars throughout history as well as exploitation that includes such institutions as slavery. Because institutionalized religions are invariably on the side of the political and socioeconomic elites, their “unifying” element only helps the elites to impose conformity on the masses, and it is no different with the NWO, regardless of what fanatic and opportunistic religious elements claim on this score.

It is true that the current Pope Francis is a great deal more progressive than any Pope in recent history. He is critical of the rich-poor gap in the world, critical of capitalism as the panacea, and far more interested in inter-faith cooperation than any recent pontiff.  Pope Francis has reached out to everyone and really tried to project a new image of a more humble leader closer to the masses than to the elites with which the Vatican has historically identified. His message is directed toward the clergy of other faiths as well as religious followers so that they put aside their differences and find common ground for coexistence instead of perpetuating divisions and hatred. However, there is absolutely nothing the Vatican can do about the NWO, about ending hostilities between religious fanatics on all sides and certainly the Pope will not be able to provide a political solution for conflicts when that is the role of governments.

There are those who believe that there is a connection between Satanic cults and religious cults linked to the NWO, as though the NWO were some corporation, government agency, international bank like the World Bank, etc. The NWO is a vague concept no different than the concept of American Exceptionalism, US neo-isolationism or the Puritan Work Ethic. While it is possible for groups or people to infiltrate the State Department, the IMF, Microsoft Corp. etc, is possible that a religious cult could possibly infiltrate “American Exceptionalism” or any of the concepts I mentioned above? It is very unfortunate that so many people yield to irrationality and conspiracy theories that honestly stretch credulity to the utmost limits. It is one thing to analyze the NWO as detrimental to the American conservative tradition of isolationism and another thing to blame religious cults and Satanic groups of controlling and manipulating “IT”.

5) Single World Currency Theory: What would it take for a one world currency to happen and what are the advantages and disadvantages in how a world currency would affect our planet? 

The issue of the single world currency theory raises questions about who enjoys monetary policy control, which by extension means control if not inordinate influence over fiscal policy, trade policy, labor policy, etc. over all nations using the currency. We have seen a mini-model of a bloc currency with the euro and how Germany as the hegemonic economic power uses the currency to determine what policies each of the members will pursue that ultimately strengthen finance capitalism strongest in Germany. The revitalization of capitalism and PR proclamations about the “end of history” as though the world underwent social discontinuity and the Second Coming of capitalism was upon us seemed to be very hollow as contemporary history has indeed proved in the last 25 years.

Capitalism sinks into crisis mode when it contracts cyclically (every fifteen to twenty years or so), dragging down with it democracy and political institutions, that even apologists of the political economy acknowledge as major media outlets indicate with their headlines. While the NWO public relations drums are a bit softer in recent years owing to the end of the recession that started in 2008, conspiracy theory advocates are gaining ground because a handful of people own half of the world’s wealth. Although the NWO concept tends to alienate if not polarize people, this does not mean that the neoliberal school of thought is not alive and well within the circles of finance and corporate capitalism, IMF, World Bank, central banks, and of course governments.  In other words, globalization is alive and well despite cyclical contractions of the economy.

The mass paranoia about the NWO is a manifestation of the culture of fear on the part of many people that their destiny is in the hands of the very powerful who have no qualms sacrificing society to retain their own privileges. Social transformation during the NWO era has resulted in a wide gap between rich and poor, a weaker middle class and working class, a weak social fabric and a political system that is behaving more like a police state than a democracy. How is this best for society in economic, social or political terms, although it is indeed great for the socioeconomic elites enjoying the second Gilded Age in America (first Gilded Age from late 1870s to late 1880s led to the age of Progressivism.)

The idea that the world economy as currently constituted can somehow find salvation through some technical monetary fix like a single reserve currency, as neo-isolationist Americans fear, is absurd because it makes absolutely no difference to global trade. If we take the EU monetary union as a model for world monetary union, then what we can expect is that a single power or two or three at most would ultimately enjoy hegemony over monetary policy. This means that the powers exercising monetary policy would do so to make sure that trade and investment advantages accrue to their corporations and their national economies at the expense of the rest. Just as Germany currently imposes monetary hegemony and by extension fiscal, trade and investment hegemony on the rest of the EU, a single world currency model would entail a similar scenario. In such a world, would China determine monetary policy, would the US and its allies, would the BRICS come together to forge an alliance? Kissinger would like to see US-China cooperation. Why is that a better scenario than US-EU-Japan one that exists now, why would not China team up with a group of countries it chooses to advance its own interests, which or many not include the US?

It is implausible and indeed a very highly unlikely scenario the world will ever see single reserve currency when we have a number of regional ones now that do the job. Exchange rate costs add to productivity costs, but that is minimal and hardly the technical panacea for structural problems of the capitalist world economy that is rooted in geographic and socioeconomic inequality. The NWO has actually exacerbated this condition, if we consider that world trade has risen sharply along with world GDP in the last three decades, yet, the rich-poor gap remains very wide, capital massively concentrated and downward social mobility in the Western World continues. A single reserve currency will not raise global GDP and it would not alter such structural conditions in the system but it will result in even greater profits for export-import business of products and services.

CONCLUSIONS

The global power of power rooted in the East-West confrontation from Truman to Reagan entailed that Moscow and Washington were managing global affairs to a large degree with China and its allies trying to be a counterweight between the two superpowers. Washington and Moscow enjoyed playing such roles in a divided world, where regional conflicts such as Vietnam dragged in the superpowers.  The NWO ended the management of world affairs between Moscow and Washington, bringing into the foreground the G-7 and China as the world’s inevitable economic superpower with the US retaining the status of the sole military superpower.

The NWO had different nuances to different US administrations. For Bush it was a clear political victory and entailed the triumph of what the French called hyperpuissance – the complete world hegemony in every domain from military to cultural. For Clinton, NWO translated into a new version of the old “Dollar Diplomacy” in so far as the US tried to secure as market share in the former Soviet republics and Asia. For George W. Bush it meant the revival of the US as the world’s policeman and seeking military solutions to political crises as we saw in Iraq and Afghanistan.  Obama borrowed from previous presidents, literally trying a balancing mix between maintaining the strength of the military industrial complex and Clinton’s Dollar Diplomacy.   

History will judge if in the first 25 years of the NOW nations and people have enjoyed greater peace and prosperity than in the 45 years before 1990 during the Soviet-American confrontation epoch. History has shown already that under the NWO there is greater wealth concentration and less income distribution among social classes in comparison to the Cold War. Contrary to euphoric claims, especially during the 1990s, that globalization can lead to democracy on a world scale, social justice, and improve welfare for the world’s masses, the tragic reality is that global poverty along with Third World debt have been rising along with political instability.

Globalization has only intensified the North-South conflict; income inequality has increased not just in the non-Western World, but within the G-7 richest countries. The result of the NWO, which is just a variation of the capitalist integration model after the fall of Communist regimes, has been socioeconomic and political polarization. Communism ended with the assumption on the part of most that entails capitalism “won” when in reality all signs point to a long decline from which there is no return. Exactly what was the victory and where are its fruits, especially in light of the renewed US-Russia confrontation over Ukraine, NATO expansion when the very existence of NATO cannot be justified by the NWO, energy policy, among other issues?

As far as the rest of the world, how has the NWO helped to promote greater national self determination when the US and its European, Japanese and Australian partners collaborate to deny national sovereignty because the ultimate goal is integration under globalization. Clearly, China has benefited enormously as a result on new market share on a world scale. Because China is the world’s new economic superpower with a bright future, the new global balance of power looks very different today than it did when Bush made his lofty speech in 1990. China benefited enormously by the persistence of high US defense spending and military adventures that siphon off wealth from the civilian economy and sink the public sector deeper in debt.

“The Peace Dividend” was just a temporary break in massive defense spending, and it did not take long to the US to create new fronts for conflict and resort to more defense spending that resulted in neither peace not any dividends for the American taxpayer. While it was the US that celebrated the end of Communism and the triumph of “End of History”, it is in fact China reaping the benefits of the NWO while the US is suffering from multiple problems, ranging from the massive public debt and chronic balance of payments deficits, to rising socioeconomic inequality to loss of faith in the institutions by an increasingly larger segment of the public. For symbolic purposes, for keeping the morale of the American people high, for purposes of distraction from economic and social issues that concern the workers and middle class, the NWO serves its purpose as much as it does to maintain high levels of defense.”

(He is the acclaimed author of three books on film and audiences, is a graduate of the film school of the University of Miami and he earned his doctorate from Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey.)

“1.     My approach to the so-called New World Order and the myriad of conspiracy theories surrounding it is to demand extraordinary proof for such an extraordinary claim. So far I have seen no evidence that leads me to believe that a New World Order exists. Briefly, though, I think it’s worth looking at exactly what adherents of this super conspiracy claim for us to understand why it is so unbelievable. The New World Order (NWO) theory argues that all of the world’s major events – namely all of the tragic, disruptive, and cataclysmic events – are secretly orchestrated by a hidden global cabal for its own nefarious ends.

A vast, interconnected network of global powerbrokers, the NWO theorists claim, are able to instigate wars, prop up and then wreck economies, assassinate the most beloved of world leaders, create global disease pandemics, orchestrate the 9/11 attacks, control the weather and cause natural disasters, hide non-polluting super technologies and sources of clean energy, all the while tainting food supplies with carcinogenic chemicals, withholding the cures for cancer and AIDS, and spread autism among infants with tainted vaccines all as a means toward the ultimate goal of putting the entire planet under the rule of a single fascist state. The global NWO cabal, it seems, can only gain from spreading misery. Apparently the NWO sees no profit in curing cancer and sees no market in non-polluting fuel sources.

Moreover, the most hard-core of NWO believers will argue that this secret brotherhood of evil is actually a millennia-old dynasty of evil, or a secret bloodline of families that has been intermarrying since at least the building of the Egyptian pyramids and manipulating the development of human civilizations in such a way as to hurt, enslave, and exploit the masses all for the profit of this small elite cabal. Many NWO believers, best-selling conspiracy author Jim Marrs the most noteworthy among them, posit that this cabal’s ultimate agenda is to keep hidden the fact that they possess forbidden knowledge culled from their partnership with ancient extraterrestrials that had genetically engineered the human race. The NWO will also one day use this technology to achieve all-out global-domination.

Therefore, my position on these claims is that I would really like to see extraordinary, incontrovertible proof that even half of these extraordinary claims have any truth to them. The main problem with the NWO theory for me is that it basically ignores all the realities of human nature and human behavior within complex systems. It would be simply impossible to keep these kinds of grand plots and machinations secret from the world. To illustrate this, just consider why an entire scholarly field devoted to the study of organizations and organizational communication has come into being. This field exists to figure out more efficient processes for groups of human beings to actually work together to accomplish a common goal.

Tasks such as a small group of people trying to come up with a simple solution to a rudimentary, every day problem will always prove deceptively difficult. Any person who worked for any organization, for even the smallest company, will know that even a simple task like five people getting together to solve the problem of deciding on how to change the phone system within the company will probably see those five people waste countless hours bickering about the shape of table they should use for the project, the kind of coffee to buy for the coffee machine, and who should take the minutes of the meeting. Furthermore, even projects such as these will quickly see their members get into ego-battles, hold grudges, form power alliances, and essentially fight amongst themselves over the most trivial details. Therefore, it stretches the imagination beyond credibility to suggest that vast conspiracies about tainting childhood vaccines or orchestrating the 9/11 attacks could be carried out by any group of human beings without someone leaking some vital part of the plot to the public.

My argument, of course, does not ignore the fact that history has also shown many spectacular instances of corruption and the abuse of power. Scandals like Watergate, Iran/Contra, or the National Security Agency’s surveillance programs have proven this. However, all of these scandals have one thing in common: they all became public very fast. If the NSA’s abuses of power could be made public by one lowly computer technician with a high school education, it becomes impossible to believe that a New World Order conspiracy could have rigged not one, not two, but three buildings in the World Trade Center, along with the Pentagon to explode and to do it all without anyone noticing or plans of the operation ever leaking.

2.     I do not believe so. Again, knowing human nature and the complexities of culture, it becomes extremely difficult to believe that outside the pages of a comic book or a James Bond film something like a global ruler could ever successfully take control of the world. One unfortunate trait of human beings is that despite the fact that no two living organisms are completely identical, what we have always enjoyed doing was trying to find others who appear to resemble us the most, to get together with these people who appear to be “like us,” and then passionately despise, war with, oppress, or attempt to wipe out those who are different. One can, for example, put a Shiite and a Suni Muslim next to each other, two people of the same race, who may speak the same language, who worship the same deity – albeit in a slightly different way – and these two people will work up enough animosity quickly enough to be able kill one another with their bare hands. Moreover, the decades since the end of the Cold War has only seen the increase of nationalism and regional conflicts driven by ethnic and cultural differences. Wars in the Balkans and the former Soviet republics attest to this. Since the early twentieth century, supranational organizations, from the League of Nations to the United Nations, have also proven to be failures at preventing wars, genocide, and a very long history of human rights violations and atrocities around the world. Fears of the sudden rise of a New World Order fascist state suddenly dominating the world, wiping out national sovereignties, going door to door to confiscate Americans’ guns, and outlawing religion are completely unrealistic.

3.     It is important to note that the idea of a New World Order is not all that new. For centuries people could easily become suspicious of groups of individuals who liked to get together and lock themselves away from the rest of the community, discuss matters in secret, and have highly selective membership policies. If these people happened to also be wealthy, fertile and active imaginations could quickly spiral into full-blown paranoia. The NWO conspiracy theories are the latest incarnations of the fear of secretive fraternal organizations like the Freemasons or the fear that the wealthy and politically connected few will use their power to subvert justice and exploit the many. In the early twentieth century, the fear of the Freemason had already transformed into the fear of global banking organizations and financiers and the subversive and destructive effect they could have on democratic systems. It is also important to note that fears of banks and financiers in the early twentieth century gave the first glimpse of the dark side of conspiracism. The term “international bankers” was a code for “Jew” and the fear of financiers manipulating the world were none-too-thinly veiled anti-Semitic conspiracy theories about a Jewish cabal plotting to rule the world.

Whether conspiracy theories are afraid of the Freemasons or the Bankers or the New World Order, they are essentially giving voice to the fears of the powerless. NWO theories seek to impose order and some sort of an explanatory and predictive system on a global landscape that may appear overwhelming, out of control, and threatening to most. The New World Order promises its believers that someone is in charge, that there is a hidden pattern to the workings of the world. It is a theory that is very similar, in fact, to religious beliefs. It attempts to offer one overreaching explanation for everything that goes on in the world. Although we might not see the individual members of the cabal, we might not know why they do what they do and how they are able to pull off their vast conspiracies, belief in the New World Order assures that somehow some kind of an invisible hand does run the world. But whereas the invisible hand of a deity in most religions tends to be benevolent, the invisible workings of the New World Order are sinister and exploitive. Belief in a New World Order and belief in such vast global conspiracies assures the world does not turn on sheer, dumb luck, that the incompetent do not get into power, and policy is not made based on irrational, thoughtless dogma but that all of the problems of the world were orchestrated by some inscrutable, invisible architect for some higher – if ultimately malicious – purpose.

It must be said, however, that as much as the New World Order theories might sound like a farrago of nonsense, one can also understand how the current state of the world helps inspire so many people to believe in them. When many saw the sudden crash of the economy in 2008, got a glimpse of the unregulated wheeling and dealing of a small, greedy financial elite on Wall Street that brought the crash about, saw almost no one brought to account for this economic collapse and we continue to see an ever widening gap between a super rich minority and the masses struggling to make ends meet, the idea of an elite ruling order running the world with complete impunity can become very attractive.

4.     The question of religious cults and the New World Order takes the issue into some of the more fantastic realms. The New World Order theory finds many of its adherents among fundamentalist Christian conservatives as well. Their version of the NWO is run by Satan’s own representative on Earth, the Antichrist. They see the NWO as a collection of Satanic organizations, from the mass media to the banking system and the United Nations. The fundamentalists see a global anti-religious and anti-Christian conspiracy afoot, a plot that will play out along the lines of a set of prophecies is the Bible’s Book of Revelations. They foresee a series of global crises from which only one ultra-charismatic leader will appear to be able to save the world. The people of the world will put all their faith in this one man and he, in turn, will deliver peace and salvation. Unbeknownst to much of the world, this savior will really be the Antichrist. At first he will be a bringer of peace, a uniter of the nations under his global leadership, then he will demand world-wide worship and abolish all religions. Finally, he will demand complete obedience, absolute worship and unleash war, terror, and persecution upon those who challenge his rule.

There is, of course, not one iota of proof that the minions of the Antichrist are plotting to take over the government, much less that the Antichrist even exists or if he has any minions in the world. These theories are reminiscent of the 1980s and early 90s panics about Satanic cults running daycare centers throughout the United States and conducting human sacrifices when not backmasking demonic lyrics on heavy metal records. The Satanic cult theories and claims of ritual abuse had been thoroughly debunked by the FBI and law enforcement organizations as nothing more than a particularly colorful and bizarre series of urban legends.

The only incident on record of a religious cult attempting to influence politics in recent history is the strange case of the followers of the Indian “sex guru,” the Baghwan Shri Rajneesh, trying to take over the government of The Dalles, Oregon, in 1984 by tainting local salad bars with salmonella before county elections.

The role of religion in politics does have a very old history in the U.S., however, and today those most actively attempting to inject religion into the political process are coming from the conservative Christian right. The very powerful base of the Republican party today is comprised of evangelicals and fundamentalists. Their very vocal agenda is to make sure that both domestic and foreign policies will be crafted in accordance to conservative Christian values. The concern this raises is the kind of impact such policy-making might have on volatile parts of the world like the Middle East, especially if these policies might be influenced by a belief in end-time prophecies.

5.     The idea of a one world currency is greatly feared by those who believe that there is a New World Order conspiring to bring the entire planet under the single rule of a global tyrant. Moves toward a global currency are just a part of the NWO’s “end game” for the complete takeover of the world and the beginning of a vast fascist state. On the other hand, some economists have argued the merits of a single global currency. There might be greater global economic stability, they say, making sure that there are no sudden rate fluctuations in certain countries.

They point to the hyperinflation crisis of Zimbabwe and argue that a global currency could guard against such emergencies. Critics, however, counter with the question of who sets monetary policy when there is one currency for the entire planet. Would it be up to a supranational organization like the U.N. to do so? Those nervous about the rise of the New World Order and its one world government warn about this outsider influence in individual countries’ economies. Would Americans, for example, ever feel comfortable with a foreign organization meddling in its monetary policy. Others still argue that a currency like the Euro, encompassing not the entire world but only one region of it, actually helped exacerbate the financial crises of Greece and Spain. These critics point to the way the Union of South American Countries halted their own proposed experiment for a shared currency because of the Euro.”

Dale Yeager.

(President of SERAPH. He has extensive training in criminal psychology, forensic psychology, sex crimes investigation, and crime scene forensics / procedures and domestic terrorism analysis.)

“1) Do you believe in a New World Order?

 Yes, the evidence is clear that throughout world history consortiums of wealthy powerful people have joined together to control their spheres of influence  primarily for economic purpose.  

2) As shown since the dawn of mankind, the world is not a unifying and harmonious place. Historically speaking, personal interest collides with other national views that ultimately caused a failed unity from all past empires.  Only if there was peace worldwide a new world order could survive .  

For example given the current geopolitics: I don’t see Putin’s Russia trying to unify with western interest any time soon, in fact, he is trying with China to come up with his own Euro Asian Union to block-off any possible diplomatic trade with the west to expand his empire. So would we ever see a planet where Russia, China, North Korea, Venezuela and The United States (to name a few), where political leaders like Putin play the harps in the presence of a world congress dressed in white robes defending all nations condemning tyranny? Is this possible? 

It’s possible. Human nature’s dark side [my area of expertise] is easily manipulated by the “cult of personality”.

– Given the high improbability of the above. Could there ever be something as a one world leader?

It would require a major world event i.e. WWIII.

3) Surprisingly in our day in age, a big percentage of people hold the N.W.O view as factual. Why are people absorbed by this idea?

Empirical means observable and replicable, the evidence of unified efforts i.e. the EU are everywhere. 

4) I guess religion plays a big factor in unifying everyone. Bahai’s, Hindus, Shintos, Zoroastrians, Jews, Manicheans, Catholics, Mormons, Christians, Buddhist, Muslims {…} all unifying into one new religion seems more like a Peter Pan story. Will we ever see The Roman Catholic Church, holding hands with ISIS leaders, cheering up the masses?

 No religion is NOT unifying. For example within the Christian religion the original version of the church is Orthodox [Greek, Russian, Coptic etc.] the Roman Catholic and Protestant versions spun off from the original. And while there are modified version of all religions the traditionalist will not be ecumenical.

– Do you believe religious cults have infiltrated the government to achieve such goal (This is the popular view)?  

Yes. Of course a secular [sociology] definition of a cult is different than a religious view of a cult. In the Christian faith the Church of Latter Day Saints is considered a cult, but in sociological terms they are considered a Christian sect. First one must define the term. 

5) New World Order supporters mention a one world currency. What would it take for a one world currency to happen? Can you give me two brief advantages and disadvantages in how a world currency would affect our planet? 

The Euro is an example of this.

Two advantages would be streamlined financial transactions and ease of carry. Two disadvantages are a lose of a countries sovereignty to control its economy and second use in criminal action.” 

C. Bonjukian Patten.

(She is a Financial Consultant with her own Bookkeeping/Office Management LLC working in the Greater NYC Area for clients in a cross section of industry.)

“Religion is NOT a unifier; its a divider. I don’t believe in religion and think most if not all the religions you mentioned are cults. Roman Catholic especially. Dark outfits for the priests and nuns – they look satanic and most of them act like satan.

Pedophiles and rapists abounded most of Roman culture back in the BC era so it stands to reason they would be the most evil. I am always amused by SUN DAY. Sunday all the catholics go to church but in reality the roman emperor Constantine celebrated THE SUN GOD and made SUN DAY that day of his own worship. I bet most Catholics don’t know that. 

Hitler wanted to be the sole leader of the world. In time we will see another one of him and will have to fight him too but I doubt the future generations will be able to muster that and will succumb to a take over. Kids today are such wimps. 

Cults have taken over most governments in the world and cults have taken over the US Congress – hence the onset of the TEA PARTY which is a cult for sure stemmed by the insane clown posse (apologies to the rock band) who call themselves Republican. 

One currency happened in Europe already with the induction of the EU but it’s failing. One world currency should never happen all over the world and the two countries that wouldn’t participate would be Australia and USA mostly because they started off as rebels and would never give up their policies unless forced. 

Instead I believe that trading for goods and services will begin again like it was between the pilgrims and the indians. Money will hopefully become obsolete. Then the 1% wouldn’t have a leg to stand on and equality would reign for awhile. Awhile until someone else figures out what it would take to become the most powerful person on the planet over everyone else. 

Human nature predicts that this will happen or try to happen. History is constantly repeating that.” 

Allen Schmertzler.

(He is an award winning and published political artist specializing in figurative, narrative and caricatured interpretations of current events.)

“This is a wonderful topic to discuss, particularly at this juncture in our evolution as a people. Conspiracy theories are everywhere. Some people believe that Elvis, JFK, and aliens are alive and living on some secret island. But the epidemic of conspiracy theories has gained more seriousness since 9/11, the Bush-Gore election and a parallel development of our living in a digital-cyber world.

Anyone can establish an audience, enable an environment whereby others repeat and propagate a myth, making it grow into a thing that is kept alive, and becomes almost “real” because of how often it gets repeated. This is exactly how Fox News chews up their media competition and devours its political opponents. It is exactly how religions and elected or dictatorial governments have and do operate. It is impossible for the public to absorb enough fact checking following every proclamation to learn The Truth.

The sound bite solicits and then seduces the dark corners of our psyche. It is the “matter” that sticks. We are living in an environment where confidence in any institution of authority is lacking and skepticism from a lack of trust allows for conspiracy theories to muscle in on our beliefs.  The space between factual and non-factual is more like a hallucination. Science is on the descent. There has been years of organized attacks disputing science. Perhaps we are now experiencing the fallout from this as a willingness to accept the existence of a New World Order in total control under a single monetary-governmental rule. I remember when the United Nations was supposed to be exactly that.

But truthfully, conspiracy theories are as old as the world’s first storytellers. My mother, who is now 87 years old, has from the earliest of my memory been one of these folks that has held the belief in a hidden world government, claiming that all other governments were mere “fronts” to keep the “real” power hidden and safe. My mother is not dumb. She just has this need to believe that life is not what we are led to think it is, and we live in a “Truman Show” with a New World Order controlling everything. Perhaps it justifies her ultimate sense of powerlessness.

But let me return to the real issue here, although I love my mom, I have decided long ago to not argue this issue with her. There is no way to convince her with science, logic, facts, or threatening to beam her aboard the mother starship in the Thorax Galaxy to prove her wrong.

The strongest arguments to support colonial America’s new government as it looked to separate from Britain were made in The Federalist Papers. The argument was that there will always be competing social, political and economic forces to check and balance power in a Constitutional America and that would prevent an aristocracy with a king or a despot from rooting here. This notion still holds true in today’s world. A total global concentration of power without any competing interests is not a reality. The only condition under which this is likely is that somehow resources for survival, such as water, air, energy, etc become so rare and under absolute control by the so few that out of a common need to survive a New World Order takes over to manage the planet.  I do foresee a future where this can occur, as do many science fiction writers. But for now, at least under our current life cycle we are more likely to see what I call a “New World Disorder,” A world of obscene, selfish, nihilistic and greedy competing forces for power and wealth.

The billionaire oligarchs have the advantage to yield way greater societal and global influence. They can spin any tale, pay for the media to spread it, monopolize goods, create false scarcity, or manipulate supply and demand and fear and loathing. They can build or tear down beliefs, governments, armies, or whatever with unparalleled power. But, even within their “1%” ranks, human greed and avarice will play a stronger force than collaborative compassion and generosity. In addition to the oligarchs, sociopaths with the Internet and social media along with smaller and smaller divergent groups can weigh in to influence, control vulnerable and naïve groups by owning a narrative that spread conspiracies.  What becomes a fact in today’s “selfie” world? What becomes the next conspiracy to go viral supported by a falsified altered streamed video on You Tube?

So for now, and into most of our current life cycle, I foresee a New World Disorder. Science and trust are passé. Desperate and depraved and deprived rebel forces of every type will seek the likeminded to band together under illusions and perceptions, while the likes of Sheldon Adelson, the Koch brothers, and other global oligarchs continue to try to morph the blueprints of society into their own genome but will ultimately fall prey to microeconomic forces connected thru digital means, impossible to control, yielding greater dysfunction, rebellion, genocide, crimes against humanity, leaving humanity in fear of terror, a world fractured, fracked, freaked, living under “The New World Disorder.”  

Nicole Horelt. 

(She is a freelance writer from Canada with a strong interest in geopolitics and foreign policy. She’s written with emphasis on the topics of Israel, the Middle East peace process, the EU, and has continued interest in the unique politics of the SCO, Eurasia, and international Arctic issues.)

“In response to the first question, I do believe that due to increased knowledge via technology – ‘digitizing’ the global population, thus the ability for instant communication, and the fact that travel by flight is possible, making global business more accessible etc.. that world thinkers such as Henry Kissinger must have concluded the possible effects ‘a small world after all’ would have on mankind. Logically, since the people of the world are globalizing, it is creating  an atmosphere without borders… this quick world of communication with power of making change via social media, etc…represents a population that globalists thinkers may worry that may grow ‘out of control’ and thus think about ways to ‘reign it in’. I believe One World Order, it’s foretold in the Bible, and it is working out that way due to an ungoverned population created via increased technology and travel.

Previously in a question answered here in ‘El Café’ regarding world superpowers, i wrote about Russia + the SCO and the EU as main contenders for world superpowers. The EU is working on a single market, it has made a huge trade deal with Canada and it is working on one with the US. Russia, is unstable in the financial department and is looking for war, it would seem that Russia wouldn’t be involved anytime soon in the world currency, but the EU looks like an empire making deals all over the world, appearing very much like a rising empire with a one world currency in the making.

With regard to religious cults infiltrating the government, it appears that there may be a move to eliminate extremism, terrorist groups by an international coalition of nations (of differing faiths) mutually agreeing to work together in this regard. This is a step forward into a world when an interfaith ‘moderate’ movement may take place, globally.

In September of 2010, I wrote an article entitled, ‘Interfaith movement brings world closer to global religious system’, published by examiner.com. The theme of this article covers much of the topic of the questions presented, and i’d like to share it with you as a response. It’s basis is grounded in the Bible; prophecies regarding ‘the end of days’ or ‘the last days’ prior to the coming of the ‘Messiah’

‘During the last days prior to the return of Jesus Christ, one of the many signs heralding His return will be a global apostasy (2 Thessalonians 2:3) coinciding with a global cry for peace.(1 Thessalonians 5:3) Globalized communications of our day facilitate the rise and speed of this falling away from the faith, and have also been prophesied since the Bible foretells the world will see certain events come to pass. (Revelation 11:9-10; 17:8)

With nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons technology, terrorist threats, combined with several nations increasingly more hungry for power and domination than for true peace, the capability of mankind destroying all life on earth today, is real. Over 2000 years ago, Jesus predicted this capability for world destruction at a time when only spears and swords were the weapons used. (Matthew 24:21-22)

All these factors and more, play into the role of fulfilling the prophecy found in Revelation chapter 13, the time coming when the Antichrist , or ‘false messiah’ forms his one world religion (Revelation 13:12

To get to the point of global worship of the Antichrist who will rule the world temporarily during the tribulation prior to the return of Jesus Christ , the true Messiah, there must (logically) be a global ‘conditioning’ or preparation, and this begins with apostasy, or the ‘falling away’ from the true faith in Jesus Christ in much of the Christian world. This is happening right now and increasingly so, with the global cry for peace. Jesus Christ is denied as being the ‘only way, truth, and life’ (John 14:6) and in many churches, this truth is excluded (subtly in many cases with a weak gospel) in the name of ‘peace and tolerance.’ How can this happen? What is the motive or inspiration? This is an examination of only a few factors working together to bring about this change

In an August 30, 2010 article entitled, ‘Religions should unite against radicalism,’ Imam Faisal Abdul Rauf, who is leading the project to build a mosque and muslim/interfaith centre near the site of the September 11, 2001 attacks, provides a clue: “we are all in this together … there is a common threat: Radicalism, which exists in all religions.” He further states, “the real battlefront is not between Muslims and non-Muslims – the real battlefront is between moderates and extremists.” In a Daily Times article entitled, “Interfaith harmony for world peace,” the author Mohammed Jamil concludes that the ‘fundamental reason for the turmoil and tension in the world is the absence of a just economic order.’ In his reasoning, interfaith harmony is a means to solve this problem.

In 2008, King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia called for interfaith dialogue between Islam, Christianity and Judaism and said at that time, “If God wills it, we will then meet with our brothers from other religions, including those of the Torah and the Gospel to come up with ways to safeguard humanity.” The king, who is the guardian of the holy sites of Mecca and Medina reasoned that the major faiths “shared a desire to combat the disintegration of the family and the rise of atheism in the world.”

“The unifying theme in all interfaith dialogue is ‘tolerance.’ While this sounds virtuous and good, it is deceptive for that very reason. There is no question that peace-making is a noble effort. However, in the name of ‘tolerance’ and for the cause of eradicating ‘radicalism,’ it is highly likely that the Christian faith, specifically those who teach and maintain that Jesus Christ is the only way to God as truth – will be viewed as intolerant and bigoted, and even extreme. The increase in religious tensions all over the world in all forms; terrorist attacks, burning of books, arguments against the banning of books from schools, public offices, etc., will likely lead to global restrictive religious laws, in attempt to reduce these tensions, and promote ‘tolerance’ as a means to bring about global peace.

The blending of faiths, and unifying of world religions in the name of peace, but to the exclusion of truth, is leading the world and those who follow this path into a deceptive trap–of confusion similar in concept to the story of the tower of Babel.

In summary, worldwide peace could never be achieved by corruptible leadership, and man himself who is capable of sin. Worldwide peace and security can only be achieved by the leadership of the Creator of the Universe! Who else? Only His Ways are Perfect. Until then, globalization continues to occur at high speed as a result of the times and technology digitizing the world population and connecting them in such a way that change occurs quickly in influential ways, signaling a time that is ripe for the ‘One World ‘order’.”

Jaime Ortega.

(President of The Daily Journalist.)