Skip to main content

Has The NWO Just Witnessed It's Defacto Defeat?

The New World Order (loosely defined as the push via globalization of the special interest parties of international banking/big business, the Military Industrial Complex and the great old money dynasties along with their politically lobbied stooges) has pressed for cohesion and hegemony over global affairs over the last two or three hundred years.  Who "They" are is widely misunderstood and much less interesting than many would have you believe and I'll clarify this shortly. Their politics and institutions have been  either purposefully or incidentally established in fashion conducive to maintaining the sway of global geopolitical outcomes in the favor of the establishment. For the most part the "establishment" is superficially indistinguishable from a proper establishment defined by conventional wisdom, an establishment one would expect to be spawned from evolving democratic societies, but with one important difference. Wherever the status quo is threatened or opportunity presents itself the special interests act. This is not necessarily in a scheming and coordinated evil plot but occasionally it is so.  They tend to mobilize through war and economic maneuvering to snuff out any threat no matter the cost in blood.  Public sentiment is not a major hurdle since it's usually swiftly dealt with and manipulated by the media who on average fall under some or other of these groups shareholdings.

For the less informed there simply is no NWO, for them this concept is pure fantasy. They are still stuck at the part where they don't believe (as they see it) that such a complex network of interests could all sit together in a room and pull the strings to plot and scheme to manipulate world affairs in such an improbable and Machiavellian fashion.  Of course the joke is on them because that is a crude and ignorant assessment, not helped by hordes of quacks on the internet who think the queen is a lizard, shape-shifters and aliens walk among us and there are Jews hiding under every rock salivating over the next opportunity for mischief.  That is not to say that there are no special interest groups behind false flag attacks and similar such mobilizing of public sentiment, we know for certain there have been historical cases that are now universally accepted and many more have become hotly debated by larger and more mainstream sectors of the population than ever before. We simply have to be careful to ensure we ask questions rather than give answers where are are no proven facts, and a helpful hack: ALWAYS use the term "corruption allegation" instead of "conspiracy theory" if you don't want your sober and informed discussion to be written off to prejudice by establishment apologists. 

The truth is that the apparent cohesion and collaborating we see manifesting itself on the geopolitical stage is simply the net outcome of these powerful influences protecting their interests. Plotting and scheming together is not required but of course this happens at times and even in reality we occasional see the sort of intrigue and espionage we usually associate with a James Bond movie. In that same reality, however, for the most part these groups are layered, fragmented and at odds with each other but there is still one common bond that tends to prevail. The super elite, the billionaire class (not all of them and not the millionaire class) typically works to suppress the numerical advantage of the masses for their own financial gain.

But this is all changing. We have to start seeing silver linings not just dark clouds. The refugee crises in Europe is casting doubt on leadership despite the challenges it is producing. There has been a subtle shift towards the Palestinian cause despite the current hardships they are enduring. Innovative cryptocurrency like Bitcoin threatens central banker control. Gold is back on the radar to challenge the market front-loading of fiat currency via it's mischievous devices like QE.  The concept of "trickle down economics" is dead. Suspicion is circling like vultures around the two-party perversion of justice known as the US election. Leaders like Ron Paul, Jeremy Corbyn, Bernie Sanders and host of more of their ilk seem to be gaining some kind of traction after the widening wealth divide has caused simmering global social discontent, perpetually unfulfilled promised and an insatiable lust for war.

The mighty petrodollar is crumbling as I point out in this piece:

Paul Craig Roberts points out when the decisive shift in the balance of power started to manifest:

Russia has unseated the bloated soggy petrodollar king from his throne of blood in the middle east as the US/Saudi/Turkish/Israeli backed effort to overthrow Assad appears to be on the brink of failure:

I don't know where things will go from here.  The establishment is still the establishment and the special interests will still protect what they perceive to be theirs, but they will have to do in an environment where a slowly awakening public is starting to see the fat and grabbing fine-gloved paws for what they are, instruments of institutionalized thievery.

"If there was hope, it MUST lie in the proles, because only there in those swarming disregarded masses, 85 per cent of the population of Oceania, could the force to destroy the Party ever be generated. The Party could not be overthrown from within." George Orwell from Nineteen Eighty-Four

One thing is for sure, they may be down are down but not out:

Popular posts from this blog

Scientific Consensus is that Consensus is overturned 100% of the time

Everything you know is wrong. There is a very good reason why science succeeds more often than politics does.  Unlike politics, It's not a consensus or a vote,  it's actually method.  The scientific method. Anyone who has read this blog before probably knows I'm a lifelong science junkie as well as someone who spends thousands of hours breaking down the the political and economic agendas behind the special interest groups that guide public policy.  In many ways I'm actually uniquely qualified to tie these angles together in ways not well understood by the overwhelming majority of people.  That actually includes scientists. Scientists are notoriously naive in the political and economic forces that drive the human world.

First and foremost,  what is this so called 'consensus' anyway.  You will be horrified to find out,  it's not specifically that global warming is man made.  It's simply that humans contribute to climate change in an unknowable way and to…

CO2 is not a pollutant, it is greening the earth!

Whatever your persuasion is on CO² and AGW, nobody disagrees on the tremendous benefit it provides plant life. Many of the past famine disasters and desertification has CO² decline listed as a contributor.

I feel I've already blown the notion that humans are the main cause of climate change out of the water. Or rather I've used the reasoning of others and put it together in a convenient outline. See my previous post above for starters.  However, I recognize that humans do increase CO² levels, no matter how tiny. Increases are likely to be very short lived because the earth has an effective feedback mechanism, but we can apparently get small increases, and it's been put forward on very poor science that this is a bad thing. That assertion hinges completely on bad models. More on that in the bottom most link.  Model's and the measurement sample dates are dubious at best.

Furthermore, the main increase in CO²  as…

You Don't Know What Capitalism Is So Stop Using The Word!

I am writing this for one purpose, to be able to post it every time the issue comes up in conversation to prevent myself from dying of boredom on a few key issues with label intellectuals, you know, the sort who drop labels for the singular purpose of demonstrating their talent at dodging real issues by posing as someone who knows the definition of a word.

When it comes right down to it, I personally think most economic and, for that matter, socio-economic systems across the entire capitalism/ socialism spectrum could work if corruption could just be reasonably controlled.  Many forget that Socialism still runs on the capitalism economics system and the finer points actually come down to policy and regulations. This is often missed.  That being said, I am fairly sure that many of the criticisms of communism for example are valid, and views that it does not work especially well because it tends to kill the inventiveness and passion of the human spirit do stand, but not for the reasons…