Which ‘New World Order’?

Who is planning a ‘New World Order’ (NWO),  in what form, and what progress so far?  The obvious focus is the rapid advance of ‘globalism’.

Scan down to read the latest articles.  Links to more articles are at the end of this post.

Globalists Want Venezuela As The Next Jewel In Their Crown

Globalists Want Venezuela As The Next Jewel In Their CrownBy Richard Enos, Collective Evolution, 31 January 2019

 The Facts:

Juan Guaidó, the 35-year-old leader of Venezuela’s opposition-controlled national assembly, recently declared himself president of Venezuela, as part of a globalist-backed coup in attempt to overthrow recently inaugurated president Nicolas Maduro.

  • Reflect On:

What are the ways in which we are continuing to condone these geopolitical activities? Are we having trouble separating Western propaganda from our basic human values?

The attempted coup taking place in Venezuela right now is very instructive for those seeking to better understand the current geopolitical power struggle, as it is one of the most transparent illustrations of the well-worn tactics employed by the forces behind Western hegemony.

Ideologies such as ‘socialism,’ ‘economic growth’ and ‘democracy’ continue to be bandied about in mainstream discourse with the highest degree of distortion. This is often intentional in order to justify political and military action that simply enriches the global elite at the expense of humanity at large. The problem is that much of the general public in the West continue to support these tactics by failing to see the thinly-veiled hypocrisy inherent in them.

What Is Happening In Venezuela

Venezuela under Hugo Chavez (1999-2012) was a thorn in the side of Western globalists, as Chavez became one of the greatest and most vocal critics of Western exploitation of his time. He named Nicolas Maduro as his successor in 2012. Maduro has been in power ever since, winning elections in 2013 and 2018.

While Maduro amassed over two-thirds (67.8%) of the popular vote in 2018, his inauguration a few weeks ago was soon followed by statements from the European Union and others that they did not accept Maduro as the legitimate president based on election ‘irregularities.’

In a move that seems impossible to justify on constitutional grounds,  Juan Guaidó, the 35-year-old leader of Venezuela’s opposition-controlled national assembly, recently declared himself president of Venezuela, despite the fact that he did not even run in the presidential election. His actions are described in this Guardian article:

The young politician stood before thousands of protesters in Caracas and swore himself in as interim president – a move that was immediately greeted by the US and Canadian governments. Guaidó first signalled that he was willing to mount a serious challenge to the country’s president in early January when Nicolás Maduro began his second term of office following elections last summer that were widely denounced as fraudulent.

The inauguration was met with a chorus of international disapproval, and Guaidó, just six days into his post, told the world he was ready to assume the presidency until free and fair elections could be held – provided he had the vital support of the military.

Battle Lines Drawn

The parameters of this battle are easily delineated. Those nations under the control of globalists–and we must include the United States in this until proven otherwise–are offering their support to Guaidó. This is simply because support for Guaidó is support for the Globalist agenda, which in this case is bringing Venezuela’s vast resources, including the largest proven oil reserves in the world, under the control of Globalist oligarchs.

The statement of support for Guaidó on the part of the European Union that the voice of the people ‘cannot be ignored’ is particularly hypocritical. If the EU really believed this, why are they offering no support to the majority in France who passionately want Emmanuel Macron removed from power? Simply because this unelected, bureaucratic body advances their Globalist agenda over the welfare of the people every time. Emmanuel Macron is a Globalist, so they will defend his constitutional right to stay in power with extreme prejudice. Nicolás Maduro is not a Globalist, so they will have absolutely no consideration for his constitutional right to stay in power.

Meanwhile, it is those few nations who have resisted globalism that unsurprisingly support the autonomy of Venezuela and hence the constitutional right of Maduro to retain power:

MPs in Russia, a major Venezuelan ally, criticised US moves against Maduro. “The United States is trying to carry out an operation to organise the next ‘colour revolution’ in Venezuela,” Andrei Klimov, the deputy chairman of the foreign affairs committee of the upper house of parliament, said, using a term for the popular uprisings that unseated leaders in Georgia, Ukraine and Kyrgyzstan. Another committee member, Vladimir Dzhabrailov, said: “I do not think that we can recognise this – it is, in essence, a coup.”

Turkey and Cuba and Bolivia’s Evo Morales have also offered their support for Maduro. (source)

Anyone who has heard Russian President Vladimir Putin speak about geopolitics is familiar with his opposition to globalism in favor of a ‘multipolar’ global power structure, in which autonomous nations have their say and international matters are dealt with through consensus and agreements. I am not suggesting that Putin or Russia are without fault. What should be clear, though, is why nations in favor of (or at least under the control of) Western hegemony make a habit of demonizing Putin and Russia’s activities in the world. It is because Russia currently stands as the biggest obstacle to the Globalists’ dream of a one-world government.

Nicolás Maduro Is No Saint

Supporting Nicolás Maduro’s constitutional right to serve out his term is not necessarily an endorsement of the man himself, his failed policies, or his allegedly unlawful suppression of dissent. But like Hugo Chavez before him, who espoused a form of socialism in an attempt to address the ills of poverty and economic disparity in his country, we could at least hold out hope that he is a leader with some regard for the welfare of his people.

Perhaps the same could be said about Juan Guaidó. But I want to be clear, this is not a question of which of these two men cares more about their people. This is a question of which one was elected into power, and which one is favored by the globalists. The main push behind this Western-backed attempted coup is the exploitation of a nation, which includes the enslavement of its people.

Yes, Venezuela is currently suffering economic hardship right now, and some blame has to be put on the government. But we should not forget the impact of sanctions from the Western world, who do everything in their power to bring about economic hardship to countries that are not aligned with imperialistic policies. The Globalists don’t want to support oil-rich nations benefiting economically from the oil industry unless they get the lion’s share. Sanctions are usually coupled with the CIA’s clandestine ‘opposition-building’ that they have been perfecting since the Iranian coup-d’état of 1953. This involves organizing and funding supposedly ‘grass-roots’ opposition to stir up the perception that the majority of the country are seeking regime change. This is all done in order to create the desired conditions to allow them to ‘save the day’ with the installation of a hand-picked puppet who is willing to go along with globalist exploitation.

Whether or not the coup attempt is successful here is partly contingent on which leader has the support of the military. But, believe it or not, each of us in the Western world has an impact on this as well.

How We Continue To Enable Western Imperialism

By and large, the Western public continues to turn a blind eye to the attempts on the part of Western powers to use strong-arm tactics to ‘persuade’ countries like Venezuela to fall in line with the way the globalists want their country to operate. Why? Because many of us still believe that our political and economic systems are the best and are more than willing to disregard the notion that other nations are sovereign if we can be convinced that forcing other nations to do things the way we do them will ultimately benefit us.

Ending this kind of behaviour is not founded in defeating the globalists, but rather in gaining enough awareness as a collective to reject the pro-Western propaganda we are being fed. This falls in line with the message of John Perkins, author of the classic ‘Confessions of an Economic Hit Man.’ Aside from providing detailed evidence and insight into Western imperialism from his first-hand involvement in it, he takes great pains to explain why it continues to be condoned as a political and economic strategy:

“It is driven not by a small band of men but by a concept that has become accepted as gospel: the idea that all economic growth benefits humankind and that the greater the growth, the more widespread the benefits. This belief also has a corollary: that those people who excel at stoking the fires of economic growth should be exalted and rewarded, while those born at the fringes are available for exploitation.”

The Takeaway

Our Western Powers, as invincible as they may seem, can only continue to perpetrate economic and political intimidation of sovereign nations as long as the majority of people in the West either approve of it or turn a blind eye to it. If indeed we want to create a world in which there is fairness, respect, freedom, and many of the other things that we value, then we have to look upon world events with a discerning mind, seeing through the propaganda enough to become fully aware of when the basic human values that we espouse are not being maintained.

=================

The Corrupted United Nations

The Corrupted United Nations  By Maurice Newman, 26 October 2018

If the leaders of some nation states were citizens living in a civilised society, they would be in jail for perpetrating, or being accessories to, murder, torture, theft and corruption.

Yet they and their chosen representatives shamelessly take their place in the hallowed chamber of the UN General Assembly as arbiters of how the rest of the world should behave.

Take the Human Rights Council, which counts among its members the Democratic Republic of the Congo, where Joseph Kabila’s unconstitutional rule features massacres and gender-based violence among a long list of atrocities; and Venezuela, where President Nicolas Maduro strangles political opposition by carrying out hundreds of arbitrary killings under the guise of fighting crime.

There’s The Philippines, whose President Rodrigo Duterte condones policies that result in extrajudicial killings of suspected drug dealers; and Cuba, where President ­Miguel Diaz-Canel, in true Castro style, allows beatings, public shaming and termination of employment to quell political ­opposition. China’s President-for-life Xi Jinping oversees the holding of about a million Muslim ­Uighurs, including women and children, in re-education camps.

Yet this year Australia celebrated its membership of the UNHRC, while the US commendably withdrew, saying the council “has provided cover, not condemnation, for the world’s most inhumane regimes”.

Australia is also a member of the Economic and Social Council which, “to find effective approaches to ending poverty”, believes “those experiencing it must have a seat at the table’’. And so they do. The leaders of Algeria, Chad, El Salvador, South Africa, Sudan, Togo and Venezuela, to name a few, all believe in wealth redistribution. They practise authoritarian central planning and asset confiscation.

Not too many champions of competition and market economics there. Australia acts as a good global citizen, lending support for “collective action” that rewards bad behaviour.

Unsurprisingly, the UN’s Ecosoc readily accepts that “climate change and environmental crises are the result of vastly unequal levels of development in the last few centuries. The countries which are now rich became so by ignoring the consequences for the environment which now threaten the entire planet.” Ecosec reminds us of Agenda 21, put to the UN’s 1992 Rio de Janeiro Earth Summit, which recognises that the burden of climate change (whatever that may be) “falls most heavily on poor countries”.

Masterminded by Canadian socialist/Marxist and multimillionaire Maurice Strong and held under the auspices of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, the Rio summit was the largest political gathering in history. Strong believed the UN should become a world government with “environmentalism” the key driver. He believed: “The concept of national sovereignty … will yield only slowly and reluctantly to the new imperatives of global environmental co-operation. It is simply not feasible for sovereignty to be exercised unilaterally by individual nation states, however powerful.”

Journalist and long-time UN expert Claudia Rosett observes Strong understood how the “UN’s bureaucratic culture of secrecy, its diplomatic immunities, and its global reach, lends itself to manipulation by a small circle of those who best know its back corridors”.

Strong exploited this culture to ensure climate change became so embedded in global politics that few Western politicians would have the courage to challenge it, no matter how exaggerated its claims, or the financial cost. And so it has proved. His successor and fellow Marxist, Christiana Figueres, led the Paris climate conference that captured Australia.

Enter US President Donald J. Trump. In his second address to the UN General Assembly in September, Trump said: “America is governed by Americans. We reject the ideology of globalism and accept the doctrine of patriotism.”

He said the UN Human Rights Council had become a “grave embarrassment” and that countries admitted to the WTO “violate every single principle on which the organisation is based”. He said: “We will not allow our workers to be victimised, our companies to be cheated, and our wealth to be plundered and transferred.” He withdrew from the Paris climate agreement, calling it a “massive redistribution of United States’ wealth to other countries”.

In the 26 years since the Rio summit, no world leader has posed such a comprehensive threat to UN hegemony. Not only does Trump reflect disillusionment with globalism at home, he also taps into growing disenchantment with supranational governments in many places around the world, particularly in Europe.

Brexit was the first example. Italy’s defiance in the face of Europe’s rejection of its draft budget is the latest. While acknowledging Italy violates EU rules, Deputy Prime Minister Luigi Di Maio says: “This is the first Italian budget that the EU doesn’t like. I am not surprised. This is the first Italian budget that was written in Rome and not in Brussels.” A recent poll in Poland found a third of the country now backs an EU exit.

It is clear serious cracks in the relationship between the people and governing bodies like the UN and the EU are emerging. People may not fully understand the way remote, supranational governments work, but they can recognise authority which is harmful and lacking in integrity.

Australians are at that point, sick of being lectured to by UN “special rapporteurs”. They are crying out for leaders to stare down faceless bureaucrats in ­Geneva. They are angry at meaningless gestures and slavish obedience to pointless emissions targets that are crippling our industry and causing personal hardships.

The latest Australian Institute of Company Directors survey confirms the desperation corporate leaders feel over the government’s inept response to climate change, the No 1 issue they want addressed.

The UN and agencies like the IMF have been exposed as hypocritical emperors without clothes. If this is a preview of world government, we face a grim future.

================

Ex-Facebook Executive: You Don’t Realize It But You Are Being Programmed

Ex-Facebook Executive, You Don’t Realize It But You Are Being Programmed  By Mustapha Itani, Vai Medium.com / Zerohedge, 24 April 2018

Several months ago, one of the early pioneers of Facebook and its first President Sean Parker, voiced his regret regarding helping create social media in the form we know it today, saying:

“I don’t know if I really understood the consequences of what I was saying, because of the unintended consequences of a network when it grows to a billion or 2 billion people and it literally changes your relationship with society, with each other,”…

”God only knows what it’s doing to our children’s brains.”

Parker says the social networking site exploits human psychological vulnerabilities through a validation feedback loop that gets people to constantly post to get even more likes and comments.

“It’s exactly the kind of thing that a hacker like myself would come up with, because you’re exploiting a vulnerability in human psychology,” he said.

“The inventors, creators?—?it’s me, it’s Mark [Zuckerberg], it’s Kevin Systrom on Instagram, it’s all of these people?—?understood this consciously. And we did it anyway.”

 Later on, another former Facebook executive opened up about the same concerns.

Chamath Palihapitiya, former vice president of user growth at Facebook stated at a recent public discussion at the Stanford Graduate School of Business, “I think we have created tools that are ripping apart the social fabric of how society works.”

”The short-term, dopamine-driven feedback loops we’ve created are destroying how society works,” Palihapitiya said.

“No civil discourse, no cooperation; misinformation, mistruth. And it’s not an American problem? – ?this is not about Russians ads. This is a global problem.”

Palihapitiya then expressed the feeling of guilt, “I feel tremendous guilt. I think we all knew in the back of our minds?—?even though we feigned this whole line of, like, there probably aren’t any bad unintended consequences. I think in the back, deep, deep recesses of, we kind of knew something bad could happen. But I think the way we defined it was not like this.”

“So we are in a really bad state of affairs right now, in my opinion. It is eroding the core foundation of how people behave by and between each other. And I don’t have a good solution. My solution is I just don’t use these tools anymore. I haven’t for years.“

Unapologetically American” Green Beret Explains “Why We…

Almost 40,000 people have “liked” an by UFC Middleweight Tim Kennedy.

Concerning the issue of social media as a whole, Palihapitiya stated that he doesn’t use it anymore since he “innately didn’t want to get programmed.” And as for his kids, “they’re not allowed to use this shit.”

Then he goes on to express some really strong sentiments:

“Bad actors can now manipulate large swaths of people to do anything you want. It’s a bad, bad state of affairs. And we compound the problem. We curate our lives around this perceived sense of perfection, because we get rewarded in these short term signals: Hearts, likes, thumbs up. And we conflate that with value and we conflate it with truth, and instead what it really is is fake, brittle popularity that’s short term and that leaves you even more, and admit it, vacant and empty before you did it. Because it forces you into this vicious cycle about what’s the next thing I need to do, because I need it back. And think about that compounded by two billion people.”

“Everybody else has to soul-search a little bit more about what you’re willing to do,” he said.

“Because your behaviors, you don’t realize it, but you are being programmed. It was unintentional, but now you gotta decide how much you’re willing to give up, how much of your intellectual independence.”

He finishes this up by warning the audience not to think they’re too smart to fall for the implications of social media, and stated that those who are best-and-brightest are the most likely to fall for it, “because you are fucking check-boxing your whole Goddamn life.”

Now this is some really strong stuff, especially coming straightforward from Frankenstein’s mouth.

==================

Previous articles 

About Peter Senior

I'm a very experienced and pragmatic management consultant. I've reviewed and led the restructuring of many organisations - large and small corporations and Government Departments, much of the time as President of the New Zealand Institute of Management Consultants. Before that I was General Manager of a major NZ newspaper; earlier, an analyst for IBM UK. I gained an honours degree in engineering at London University, and studied management at Cambridge University. This wide range of experience has left me frustrated: I continue to see too many examples of really bad management. Sometimes small easily fixed issues; sometimes fundamental faults; and sometimes really tricky problems. Mostly these issues can be fixed using a mixture of common sense, 'management 101' and applying lessons from years of management experience. Unfortunately, all too often, politics, bureaucracy and daft government regulations get in the way; internal factors such as poor culture and out-of-date strategies are often evident. So what's gone wrong, and why, and most importantly, how to fix 'it'? I hope there are like-minded people 'out there' who will share their thoughts enabling 'us' to improve some significant management failures that affect the general public. If you just accept bad management, you don't have the right to complain! If you'd like to share thoughts on any aspects of management, send me an email to petersenior42@gmail.com . My latest project has the interim title 'You’ve been conned. Much of what you were taught and read is largely irrelevant, misleading or plain wrong – this is the REAL story of life: past, present and our possible future.' The working paper so far comprises 105 pages, many listing references and interim conclusions. The main problem is finding sufficient credible evidence, and realising the more Iearn, the more I realise I don't know!
This entry was posted in "New World Order". Bookmark the permalink.