Skriv ut Skriv ut

A New Look at the New World Order

A recent report on health conditions in Iraq, issued by an International Study Team, states that there has been a 380 percent increase in Iraqi child mortality. The authors emphasise that the sanctions imposed on Iraq are a violation of human rights and warn that the «Iraqi people» are the victims of «another weapon of mass destruction, the effective withdrawal of food and other necessities.» The terrible tragedy that is daily unfolding in Iraq is the end product of the fact that Iraq has been selected as a test case for the implementation of what George Bush has repeatedly called the ‘New World Order’. The U.S. President and his allies have targeted the Iraqi people for genocide by insisting that the sanctions be maintained until Saddam Hussein is removed from power.

As U.S. academic Noam Chomsky observed: «The Gulf War has torn aside the veil covering the post Cold War era. It has revealed a world in which the United States enjoys unchallenged military supremacy and is prepared to exploit this advantage ruthlessly. The new world order (in which the New World gives the orders) has arrived.» (Deterring Democracy)

Much has been written about this ‘New World Order’. None the less the question – ‘what does it all mean?’ – is still being asked by many people. Is it just some vague concept or a global nightmare?

Any investigation of this New World Order must be set against the
backdrop of the difficulties currently facing U.S. capitalism. United
States competiveness on the world market has declined. Japan, Germany and
the soon to be born United Europe give Washington enough reason to
formulate new plots to tame political trouble-makers and initiate new
strategies of global domination. Like Rome before its fall, the United
States ruling elites are seeking to deflect attention away from domestic
concerns and onto the world stage. There are obvious signs that not only
is the U.S. economy in deep trouble but American society itself is
collapsing from within. Economic difficulties together with grave social
problems are evidence of deep-seated ills. Drug addiction and escalating
crime are signs of a decaying system. Ethnic tensions, bureaucratization,
and the theatricalization and trivialization of politics and society are
indicators of a profound social malaise. Further, the winds of change

that are blowing in this last decade of the 20th century have convinced
Western leaders, that if the world capitalist system is to be maintained,
they must strike a new global ‘arrangement’. Washington knows that for the
U.S. to hold onto its hegemony over the world’s political, economic and
cultural affairs, a ‘New World Order’ in which the United States is the
unquestioned ‘global policeman’ is essential. Accordingly when President Bush
addressed the United Nations General Assembly he termed his New World Order a
‘Pax Universalis’. A world under the ‘universal peace’ of Western liberal
capitalist domination, enforced by United States military supremacy.

Martin Walker reported in the Guardian Weekly on 10 February, 1991:

«In his State of the Union address President Bush urged Americans to prepare
for the «next American century» in a New World Order that should be defined by
U.S. leadership in the war against Iraq. «We are the nation that can shape the
future… We are the only nation on this earth that could assemble the forces
of peace. This is the burden of leadership, and the strength that has made
America the beacon of freedom in a searching world.»

Like any good salesman George Bush has hawked his dream of a New World
Order with all the imagery of Hollywood. Promising much, but delivering
only death and destruction, the White House is putting on a
self-confident, victorious front. Noam Chomsky writes: «According to the
conventional picture, the US has won the Cold War. Righteousness has
triumphed over evil with the victory of democracy, free-market
capitalism, justice and human rights. As standard-bearer of the cause,
the United States now leads the way to a New World Order of peace,
economic development, and cooperation among those who have seen the light
– virtually everyone except for some holdouts like Cuba which still
complains that the Third World isn’t getting its due, and Saddam Hussein,
despite our dedicated efforts to improve his behaviour by the carrot
rather than the stick; an error of judgement to be rectified by the sword
of the righteous avenger.» (Deterring Democracy)

The validity of this ‘marketing imagery’ is seriously called into
question when we begin to peel away the verbiage of the New World Order
and face up to the truth about what it means for the peoples of the
earth. If Iraq and the Gulf War were the ‘test case’ of this ‘new order’
a thinking person begins to wonder if it should be more correctly termed
a ‘New Dark Age’. Is Mr Bush’s ‘pax universalis’ the peace of the grave?
War Against the ‘South’

«The US economy may not emerge from recession this year, but long term
trends are clearer. Indeed, in the next several years, the predicament of
the US industrial and financial sectors holds a message for East Asia:
the New World Order in the aftermath of the Gulf War will be far less
hospitable than the old one.»

Jeffrey Garten, ‘Asia and the New Economic Order’, FEER, 11 April, 1991.
(emphasis added)

«Much of the world’s future may be shaped by this conflict. By defining
the US role in the ‘New World Order’ as one of global police force,
President Bush is charting a course for America and the rest of the
world. This course is based on US military intervention to control access
to oil and other natural resources in the Third World. The Gulf War is
the culmination of more than a decade of US energy policies that have
consistently undermined efforts to promote efficiency and renewable
alternatives to oil. The war is being used to give a powerful new boost
to efforts to exploit oil and other natural resources in native lands and
ecologically fragile wilderness areas. It is also being used to breathe
new life into poisonous corporate energy ‘alternatives’ like nuclear
power. The US is at war to control the flow of oil into the world’s
smog-producing automobiles and smoke-belching, toxic waste-producing
factories. With 6% of the world’s population, the US consumes 25% of the
world’s oil.»

Third World Resurgence, no.7, Penang, Malaysia, March 1991.

According to British press reports, George Bush decided on committing
U.S. military forces to the Gulf after discussions with then British PM
Margaret Thatcher, while at a conference of the Aspen Institute held in
Colorado between August 8 and August 10. It is indeed revealing that what
Thatcher had to say in her formal presentation to the conference echoed
central themes of the New World Order. Pre-dating by nearly one year
George Bush’s call for global free market capitalism in his speech in
September 1991 at the UN General Assembly, Thatcher stated that Western
financial assistance will go only to those Third World countries «which
offer the best prospect of stability, which welcome enterprise, and give
a fair rate of return, with the right to repatriate a reasonable
proportion of the profits. Investment won’t come into a country unless it
can also get out.»

Under the subhead, «The Global Agenda,» Thatcher put forward the
Malthusian position pointing to population as the main environmental
danger. Adhering to the racist line of the Anglo-American ruling elite
she said: «Our ability to come together to stop or limit damage to the
world’s environment will be the greatest test of how far we can act as a
world community… Science is still feeling its way and some
uncertainties remain. But we know that very high population growth is
putting enormous pressure on the earth’s resources…. The costs of doing
nothing, of a policy of wait and see, will be much higher than those of
taking preventive action now to stop the damage getting worse.»

Thatcher’s speech showed some basic core positions that are part of the
New World Order. Positions however that are not new but have been part of
Western liberal free market thinking for a number of years. Back in 1960
James Schlesinger, later to become Nixon’s CIA director, wrote an article
headlined «The Political Economy of National Security.» His thesis:
«Despite the modification of the original Malthusian doctrine over the
years, the danger remains that the excessive growth of population will
wipe out the gains of economic progress…. We must in our strategic
policy return to the days before the Industrial Revolution and prepare to
fight limited wars.»

During the years of the Ford administration, in 1974 and 1975, Henry
Kissinger prepared plans for the U.S. invasion of the Saudi Arabian oil
fields, which according to the then U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia James
Akins, are those which were carried out during the Gulf crisis. Akins put
it this way in the Virginia Pilot on September 17, 1990: «In January
1975, the neo-conservative publication Commentary carried an article
proposing invasion of Saudi Arabia as a solution to the eternal Arab
problem and to our own economic problems,» Akins wrote. «I suggested that
anyone who would take this proposition seriously was a madman, a criminal
or a Soviet agent. Henry Kissinger, then U.S. secretary [of state], had
another view, and my career in the Foreign Service did not extend much
beyond that point.»

On November 29, 1990, NATO Secretary General Manfred Woerner, speaking at
the North Atlantic Assembly said that NATO «assets» should be available
for «co-ordination and support» of «crisis management and prevention»
efforts similar to what was then taking place in the Gulf. He argued: «A
more interdependent world is also a more fragile one, more vulnerable to
threats and blackmail…. Along the southern perimeter of Europe, there
is to some extent an arc of tension from the Maghreb to the Middle East.
Tensions are exacerbated not only by the ambitions of dictators like
Saddam Hussein, but also by population growth, resource conflict,
migration, underdevelopment, religious fundamentalism, and terrorism.
Clearly, threats to NATO’s territorial integrity from beyond Europe
cannot be down-played as out-of-area threats» (emphasis added).

The sharpest picture of the New World Order can perhaps be seen in the
ravings of Conrad Black’s Sunday Telegraph editorialist, Peregrine
Worsthorne. On September 3, 1991, Worsthorne wrote that what the world
now needs is «a new form of imperialism directed against the countries of
the Third World…. If peace-keeping is imperialism, so be it.» He
couched his proposal in terms of the necessity to create a new worldwide
«anti-barbarian alliance,» to control the flow of advanced weaponry to
«primitive peoples» in the Third World. And more, Worsthorne insisted
that nothing effective can be done about problems such as famine and
other human disasters, especially in Africa, «without the advanced
countries re-exerting political control – i.e., a return to colonialism.»
This tirade was published under the headline, «Imperialists for Peace.»

Technological Determinism

By limiting or controlling the flow of technology the Western elites
believe they can prolong the capitalist world order. Through a process of
«technological determinism» the advanced capitalist states in the North
of the globe can use technology to impose their standards on cultural
trends and have a direct effect on the organisation, thinking and
attitudes of the developing sector, the South. This works in the form of
a vicious cycle and affects culture. As the technological gap widens
between the haves and have-nots and technology makes advances in the
industrial world, Third World states push for their share, if their
national policies are acceptable to the ruling Western elites then they
are provided with a few ‘crumbs’. Inevitably the quest for Western
technology means that they lose their cultural identity in the process.

Like the prostitutes and junkies on the streets of Western cities theseThird World states become ‘hooked’ and are made dependent on the capitalist system. Technological progress is conditional on the acceptance of Western liberal values. Nations which refuse to go along with this cultural
colonialism are targeted for slander, economic blockade, sanctions, and
starved of technology. If they persist in their independent policies they will
be the victims of military attack. The Italian journalist Maurizio Blondet, in
an article in Avennire on February 27, 1991, noted: «The designed victims of
this policy are those countries which are successfully building up industries,
including military industries, independent from other countries…. Iraq, the
Muslim country with the highest rate of literacy, is perhaps the first victim
of the American policy.»

Science, is for the Western ruling elites, not the inheritance of all
humanity but a valuable commodity to be bargained-with and sold on the
open market for a very high price: the surrender of cultural integrity,
national sovereignty and independence.

Although the Western camp in general is operating on this platform of ‘technological apartheid’, the United States in particular is working onthe mechanisms of monopolising the issue of technology transfer and
striving through its institutions to control such transfers. Washington,
as a matter of policy, has resorted to threatening and blackmailing some
unyielding Third World states in search of modern technology. There are
several U.S. and affiliated agencies engaged in this undeclared warfare
to establish American domination if necessary by force, intimidation and
«civilised warnings».

Access to technology is invariably linked to the recipients ability to
pay and as most developing countries do not have access to that kind of
cash, the recognized place to get financing is the IMF, World Bank and
western investment corporations. Thus, in order to address their pressing
technological needs, Third World states are forced to borrow. And this is
exactly what Washington wants. When the rule ‘the borrower is servant’
comes into play the West can dictate its relationship with the
debt-seekers. To be eligible for loans and international credits the
technology seekers must integrate into the world market.

Experience has shown that states which have fallen into this trap in
their search for progress are more often than not stuck in a vicious
cycle. They inevitably lose their freedom and their independence.

To the extent that force is now actively employed as a means of
technology transfer policies, it is evident that the U.S. engineered New
World Order, banking on its industrial progress and technological
advancement, is seeking to make its domination total and permanent. This
same order will arrange for the disintegration of those countries which
have the potential to stand up and challenge the new order. Countries
which possess economic, political and demographic potential to confront
the New World Order.

New World Empire

When one peels away the lies and puts all the major pieces into place it
becomes horrifyingly apparent what this New World Order really is. This
is an effort to establish a new world empire, based on the control,
through military means, of raw materials such as oil, and the reduction
of what its partisans call «excessive population growth.» It is a plan
for an empire founded on genocide. Given these facts is anyone really
surprised that the sanctions on Iraq are still in place? The Western
ruling elites are carrying out a premeditated policy of genocide. This is
the New World Order!

As we have noted the elements of this New Order include:

a) Technology control; in the name of preventing access to the modern
technology which permits military capabilities to be developed. Demanded
against Iraq, this, like the «out-of-area» deployments, is also
generalised as a policy.

b) Raw materials control; here the occupation of the Gulf oil fields and
the establishment of permanent U.S. ‘rapid deployment’ bases in the
region is the beginning.

c) Food control; developed out of the concentration of world cereal
production for export among primarily the U.S.A., Canada, and Australia,
and their insistence, through such ventures as GATT, that other countries
abandon policies of food security through fostering agricultural
development, by submitting to the dictates of the free market. Egypt’s
daily grain supply is controlled directly by the United States, for

d) Population reduction; control the flows of technology, raw materials
and food, human life then continues at the whim and caprice of those who
would arrogate such control to themselves.

Dr. Ali Mazrui, award-winning author of «The Africans» and an
internationally respected African scholar commented that the New World
Order is «a kind of global apartheid.» A cursory look at some of the
people who are the inspiration behind Mr Bush’s New World Order certainly
confirms Dr. Mazrui’s analysis.

Calls for some kind of «New World Order» have come from a range of
powerful groups and individuals over the last 70 years. After the Second
World War, with the Yalta agreement and the founding of the United
Nations organisation commentators and statesmen were agreed that the
world was on the verge of a new era. During the 1950s American
conservatives like James Burnham of the National Review postulated a «New
World Order» along arch conservative lines.

However the central theme of a «New World Order» goes back a very long
way. Indeed it could well be said that ever since Man has been on the
earth certain elitist groups have sought – and actively plotted – some
form of global domination. From ancient Babylon and Rome to the British
Empire powerful people have dreamt of total global hegemony. An objective
study of what some writers have termed «hidden history» unveils the
existence of numerous quasi-religious cults, freemasonic networks, secret
societies, as well as secular political, philosophical and social
movements, all committed to the realisation of global domination by a
wealthy, powerful elite, i.e. a New World Order. Space does not permit a
thorough and complete exposure of these interlocking groups and their
manipulation of politics, economics and culture. Needless to say all
these coercive and powerful elitist bodies have a stake in the New World

There is one particular ‘elitist tradition’ that has influenced George
Bush personally and shaped much of the thinking of the current
Anglo-American elites.

In 1919 a British «secret society» was established called «The Round
Table». Its purpose was to propagandise for an Anglo-Saxon run world
government that would guarantee «world peace». This British organisation
grew out of the life-long dream of the racist gold and diamond magnate
Cecil Rhodes for a «new world order». Sara Millin, Rhodes’ biographer put
it more bluntly: «The government of the world was Rhodes’ simple desire.»

Afflicted with a heart condition, Rhodes wrote numbers of wills assigning
his fortune to trustees who would carry out his purpose. According to
Frank Aydelotte in his book American Rhodes Scholarships: «The seven
wills which Cecil Rhodes made between the ages of 24 and 46 [Rhodes died
at age 48] constitute a kind of spiritual autobiography…. Best known
are the first (the Secret Society Will…), and the last, which
established the Rhodes Scholarships….» Rhodes’s first will included the
following passage directing that his fortune form the endowment of a
«secret society» devoted to:

«The extension of British rule throughout the world…. The colonisation
by British subjects of all lands where the means of livelihood are
attainable by energy, labour, and enterprise and especially the
occupation by British settlers of the entire Continent of Africa, the
Holy Land, the Valley of the Euphrates, the islands of Cyprus and Candia,
the whole of South America, the islands of the Pacific not heretofore
possessed by Great Britain, the whole of the Malay Archipelago, the
seaboard of China and Japan, the ultimate recovery of the United States
of America as an integral part of the British Empire….» (Cecil Rhodes:
The Anatomy of Empire)

Around the same time he wrote an «Open Letter» to his collaborator W.T.
Steed, editor of the Pall Mall Gazette. The 1891 letter was not published
until after his death:

«Please remember the key of my idea discussed with you is a Society
copied from the Jesuits as to organisation, the practical solution a
differential rate (tariff)…. That the work, with America in the
forefront, is devising tariffs to boycott your manufacturers and that
this is the supreme question, for I believe that England with fair play
should manufacture for the world and, being a Free Trader, I believe
until the world comes to its senses you should declare war – I mean a
commercial war – with those who are trying to boycott your
manufacturers…. You might finish the war by union with America and
universal peace, I mean after 100 years.» (Cecil Rhodes: The Anatomy of

Frank Aydelotte continues:

«In 1888 Rhodes made his third will… leaving everything to Lord
Rothschild [his financier in mining enterprises], with an accompanying
letter enclosing ‘the written matter discussed between us.’ This, one
surmises, consisted of the first will and the ‘Confession of Faith,’
since in a postscript Rhodes says ‘in considering questions suggested
take Constitution of the Jesuits if obtainable….’ »

Apparently for strategic reasons Lord Rothschild, was subsequently
removed from the forefront of the scheme. In his 1300-page, magnus opus
Tragedy and Hope Professor Carol Quigley unmasks a conspiratorial network
of powerful elitists who have for many decades been working towards a
«New World Order». Professor Quigley noted that Lord Rosebury «replaced
his father-in-law, Lord Rothschild, in Rhodes’ secret group and was made
a trustee….»

The «secret society» was organised on the conspiratorial pattern of
circles within circles. Professor Quigley informs us that the central
part of the «secret society» was established by March, 1891, using
Rhodes’ money. The organisation was run for Rothschild by Lord Alfred
Milner. The Round Table worked behind the scenes at the highest levels of
British government, influencing foreign policy and England’s involvement
and conduct of World War One.

According to Professor Quigley:

«At the end of the war of 1914, it became clear that the organization of this system [The Round Table Group] had to be greatly extended. Once again the task was entrusted to Lionel Curtis who established, in England and each dominion, a front organization to the existing Round Table Group. This front organization, called the Royal Institute of International Affairs, had as its nucleus in each area the existing
submerged Round Table Group. In New York it was known as the Council on Foreign Relations, and was a front for J. P. Morgan and Company in association with the very small American Round Table Group. The American organizers were dominated by the large number of Morgan ‘experts,’… who had gone to the Paris Peace Conference and there became close friends with the similar group of English ‘experts’ which had been recruited by the Milner group. In fact, the original plans for the Royal Institute of International Affairs and the Council on Foreign Relations [C.F.R.] were drawn up in Paris….»

The Council on Foreign Relations (C.F.R.) was spawned by the Round Table
Group and held to its elitist views of world government and control.
According to Dr. Quigley the C.F.R. was founded by the most important
financial dynasties in America. Its original membership comprised
international financiers such as Jacob Schiff, Averell Harriman, Frank
Vanderlip, Nelson Aldrich, Bernard Baruch, J.P. Morgan and John D.
Rockefeller. These wealthy capitalists did not create the C.F.R. because
they had nothing better to do with their time and money. They created it
as a tool to further their ambitions.

The Christian Science Monitor of September 1, 1961, in one of a very few
articles published in the main line press on the C.F.R. called it «one of
the most influential semi-public organisations in the field of foreign

The C.F.R. has come to be known as «The Establishment» or «the invisible
government» because of the power it weilds. The Christian Science Monitor
states: «Because of the Council’s single-minded dedication to studying
and deliberating American foreign policy, there is a constant flow of its
members from private to public service. Almost half of the Council
members have been invited to assume official government positions or to
act as consultants at one time or another.»

As columnist Joseph Kraft, himself a member of the C.F.R., noted of the
Council in Harper’s of July 1958: «It has been the seat of some basic
government decisions, has set the context for many more, and has
repeatedly served as a recruiting ground for ranking officials.»

International banking organisations that are linked to the C.F.R. include
Kuhn, Loeb & Co; Lazard Freres (a Rothschild affiliate); Dillon Read;
Lehman Bros.; Goldman, Sachs; Chase Manhattan Bank; Morgan Guaranty Bank;
Brown Bros. Harriman; First National City Bank; Chemical Bank & Trust,
and Manufacturers Hanover Trust Bank. Among the major multinational
corporations which have men in the C.F.R. are Standard Oil, IBM, Xerox,
Eastman Kodak, Pan American, Firestone, U.S. Steel, General Electric.
Among the communications corporations represented in the Council Are NBC,
CBS, Time, Life, Look, Newsweek, New York Times, Washington Post, Los
Angeles Times, etc.

The C.F.R. consists of some of the most powerful members of the ruling
class. For decades C.F.R. literature has openly trumpeted the necessity
of working for a «New World Order». One no doubt in which the rich make
the rules! It is this plutocratic elitist tradition that has spawned
C.F.R. men like Henry Kissinger and George Bush.

The Council on Foreign Relations is linked by joint membership and
interlocking projects with other oligarchical groupings such as the
Bilderberg Group, the Trilateral Commission, the Club of Rome, and a
number of elitist ‘think tanks’ and networks. All share a common
commitment to a New World Order.


The New World Order, as we have seen, constitutes a direct attack on
national sovereignty and the right of the ordinary people to rule
themselves by themselves. Former U.S. presidential advisor Brzezinski, a
Council on Foreign Relations member, pointed out a few years back: «The
national state has ceased to be principle creative force: international
banks and multi-national corporations are acting and planning in terms
that are far in advance of the political concepts of national states.»
The ideal world for these capitalist elitists is one peopled by a
uniform, cultureless mass of consumers, useless eaters inhabiting a
Global Supermarket.

Groups such as the C.F.R., the Bilderberg, Trilateral Commission etc, as
we have seen, are made up of the world’s richest and most influential
people. They are the ruling circles of international monopoly capitalism
and are sworn enemies of national culture and national sovereignty.

W.J. Kenyon Jones, chairman of Ronson defines the duty of a corporate

«He must set aside any nationalistic attitudes and appreciate that in the last resort his loyalty must be to his shareholders of the parent company, and he must protect their interests even if it might appear that it is not perhaps in the national interest of the country in which he is operating. Apparent conflict may occur in such matters as the transfer of funds at a period of national crisis, a transfer of production from one subsidiary to another, or a transfer of export business.»

International monopoly capitalism finds its perfect political
manifestation in the centralised, hierarchical, oligarchical system of
the New World Order. Charles Levinson writes:

«No matter how complex and large modern enterprises become, the specialized
and segmented sectors of operational managers or scientist-employees will
never permit them to dictate to the centers where real overall power and
control is concentrated. The technology and structure of industry has changed
drastically over the past decades in such branches as petroleum, chemicals,
engineering, transportation, communications, etc. Banking, finance and credit
institutions have been radically transformed as well. Major modifications have
occurred in the mode of ownership, especially through domination of the
Western economies by multinational companies. Nation states are losing control
over their economies to the new global system of the multinationals. Despite
these profound and far-reaching changes of structure and technology, real
power and control in the enterprises remains essentially with the same
families, banks and combines as in the past. If anything, they are stronger
and more concentrated than before. Rockefeller, Du Pont, U.S. Steel, Mellon,
Fiat, Shell, Unilever and the fifty leading banks of the world continue to
rule over their technologically transformed empires. One merely needs to
compare the ownership and control of the oil companies, the chemical, rubber,
pharmaceutical, electronic and space industries of the world to appreciate
that real power and control has not been substantially transferred or
distributed in the West. (Vodka-Cola)

We need not search to far to see all these elements in George Bush’s
vision of a New World Order. It is a vision encompassing all the great,
albeit retrograde and anti-life, imperatives of the modern world. A
convalescing and narrowing of the age old dream of world domination. A
fundamentally perverse worldview that posits a small oligarchical elite
ruling over a mass of subjects who are deliberately kept in a state of
backwardness and degeneracy.

A form of imperial fascism in which:

«The elite claims for itself the right to plunder this population,
whether it be through the arbitrary setting of ground rent, control of a
usury-based credit system, the mechanism of state power itself, or
through the ruthless extraction of the last ounce of labor from their
subjects, be they slaves, serfs, or other inferior beings whose death
through exhaustion is viewed as a normal event.» (The Hitler Book)

A New Dark Age

Finalising this introductory overview of the forces behind Mr Bush’s New World Order there is yet another important aspect to be touched upon.

At the end of the Second World War with the signing of the Yalta
agreement between the ‘great powers’ the world was divided into two
spheres of influence, with supposedly opposed poles: Washington and
Moscow. With the collapse of the Eastern bloc over the last few years we
have witnessed the dawn of an era in which Moscow and Washington are
openly working with one accord. The New World Order is now upon us
stemming from a common agreement between the so-called ‘great powers’.
The global elites of East and West have realised a form of ‘world
imperium’ on the foundation of a shared worldview. Liberalism, bourgeois
parliamentary ‘democracy’, free market capitalism, the supremacy of
international ‘law’ (enforced by the U.S. policeman), global dictatorship
vested in the UN Security Council, and a materialist consumer culture,
are the sacrosanct idols of our modern world. Behind these ‘principles’
stand the ruling circles of East and West i.e. capitalist exploiters,
international financiers, party functionaries, technocrats, bureaucrats
and decadent regal relics. The leaders of the modern world vie with each
other for varying degrees of influence within the parameters of elitist
consensus. Rejecting any notion of perennial wisdom or natural law they
view man as an ‘economic animal’. Hence rulership is exercised from the
ability of this or that oligarchical elite to force its will upon its
underlings. Law has no objective basis in their system; all is relative
and what counts is the power to avoid responsibility for one’s own acts.

This oligarchical system is workable, of course, only if the popular
masses accept this state of affairs and ostensible superiority of the
oligarchical elite, and conceive of themselves as objects, not subjects,
of events. It is for this reason that the oligarchical system requires
more precise and more ingenious mechanisms of mass control in order to
protect itself against unwelcome surprises. The preferred mechanism of
control is a web of mythology for the masses to believe in. These myths
are carefully cultivated and applied by the elites or by designated
cultic agencies. They effectively neutralise any opposition from the
masses by keeping them conditioned, ‘asleep’ to their responsibilities,
their lives debauched by an artificial ‘culture’ of drugs, alcohol, sex,
consumer goods and irrationality. The individual is thus neutralised by
his belief that he is above all and in need of nothing, when in reality
he is just a slave to the system, awash in its ‘culture’ of pessimism
and triviality.

Since the dawn of history all mass-orientated forms of political
intelligence operations have been mediated under the auspices of either
religious or quasi-religious cults. What was Marxism-Leninism with its
trinity of idols of Marx, Engels and Lenin? A secular religion complete
with priests (communist cadres), church (the party) and holy writ (the
collected works of its founders). But, Freemasonry is perhaps the best
known oligarchical formations of this type. However, there are many
secret society formations through which the ruling circles function. The
powerful secret society networks of the French ‘Priory of Sion’, the
Italian P2 lodge, the Order of Malta and related bodies have received
some attention in recent years.

Here we have seen the New World Order in a nutshell. A world empire
established at the expense of the sovereignty of states and the right of
self-determination of nations. Run by an international Establishment of
elitists, sometimes seemingly opposed but in reality perfectly united and
co-ordinated. A world consisting of two primary classes: the masters and
the slaves, the rulers and the ruled. A world (dis)order held together by
a web of irrational, cultic mythology and consumerism pushed by a network
of programmed cultic bodies and secular civic associations. The New World
Order is the modern day Rome, a world of confusion and irrationalism
openly based on the oligarchical system of power and domination.

What should be our response in the face of this global Sinarchy? We must
organise a worldwide resistance. The New World Order is digging its own
grave, our task is to survive, to resist and to prepare for the
inevitable struggle. We must draw our plans of resistance from the battle
plans of the enemy. Answer their elitist global organisation with our own
international people’s resistance. Confront their cultural pessimism and
cultic irrationalism with truth and a dynamic New Vision of tomorrow that
sees Man as the viceregent of God on earth. We must call for genuine
progress that answers human needs and defend national sovereignty in the
face of global exploitation and robbery. Above all each one of us must
dedicate ourselves to this Great Struggle! We must resist this New Dark Age!

Spread the love

Facebook Comments

Kommenter. Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.