"New World Order". Is this still considered a conspiracy? Is it still a controversial subject, as to whether or not it exists or about to exist? Is it now justified and accepted or are many people still wary of it? If there is a march toward it, should we be concerned? If a movement toward global government by the elite exists, and we as citizens of the world condemn this action what can we do about it?
I as a concerned citizen, do not want people I can't even vote for make important decisions regarding my life. The further government institutions are away from the communities, the more irrelevant or worse, incorrect decisions are.
The most powerful influences over our lives, as we now survive today, are economic institutions. These would include, Taxation, monetary, banking, stock markets, industrial complexes, world trade etc. Who ever can control these institutions can control the world. Once these are harnessed every thing else falls into place.
But why should I even be concerned? Who gives a shit? There is no "new world order", or conspiracy to create one. Even if most governments wanted to get together to come up with a plan for us all to get along, what would be so bad about that? Shit, the world almost entered a total economic collapse and might still be at risk. So it is only prudent to set up a new economic model. Right?
Wrong! Dead wrong! Look at how Greece is squirming to get out of the financial situation it is in. Greek people are very proud of their history and culture. For them to go hat on knee begging for debt relief is demoralizing. Spain and other once great nations are in similar situations.
It is important for all nations to retain their sovereignty over their money. If you want another nation to give your currency value, then the nation of origin must produce the goods and resources to support it. If another nation wants to produce low quality merchandise and not market its resources responsibly, then they should pay the price with a lowered value currency.
By having world bodies institute our economies under one entity or one agreement, would give too much power to, too few people. Under their rules and ideologies would disputes be organized. We as citizens of our independent countries would have little relevance and no power over our own economic lives.
But WTF Letemdangle? Why do you assume such events are taking place? It's all bullshit, something you read out of context or some crazy video you watched that contaminated your weak mind.
Perhaps I am wrong, and I accept that possibility, but everywhere I look I see more evidence of it, and worse than that a complacency toward it.
I present you now the latest evidence I have found supporting the idea of a New World Order.
I'll just post some of his conclusions here with some comments by me.
Keynote address by Mr Jean-Claude Trichet, President of the European Central Bank, at the Council on Foreign Relations, New York, 26 April 2010.
First, global governance is of the essence to improve decisively the resilience of the global financial system. We avoided a major depression but it was a close call. Governments had to support the financial sector by putting at risk taxpayers money for the equivalent of around 25 % of GDP on both sides of the Atlantic. This as unprecedented. I am convinced that, if we do not reinforce significantly the resilience of the financial system, our democracies will not accept for a second time such a very large scale of rescue operation.
( He starts with some fear mongering. Then he states that the taxpayer, low to middle income earners where made responsible for the actions of greedy market speculators. Then he brilliantly, points out that the world would not put up with it again! Shit I'm still pissed about the first time).
Second, a characteristic of the recent turbulences is not only that they displayed a high level of unpredictability but also an extreme rapidity in the succession of events characterising the unfolding of the crisis. Global governance today must demonstrate a capacity to coordinate with agility and, where necessary, to decide extremely swiftly. This is also unprecedented.
( It is always a crisis that they use to remove our freedoms. Wow! Global governance will be so fast and swift! Bullshit! That's why it's unprecedented, governance of any kind by definition is slow and indecisive, never mind one that is so removed from the people)
Third, the crisis has had some paradoxical effects: on the one hand it has unleashed a tendency to reengage in financial nationalism if not mercantilism; on the other hand it had contributed to the recognition that a very high degree of interdependencies between economies called for a much higher level of cooperation. These two opposing forces are presently competing. It is imperative that effective global governance preserve the level playing field which is indispensable to foster global stability and prosperity. It is a major challenge. Both sides of the Atlantic have a very important responsibility in this respect in many domains, in particular in prudential and accounting rules.
("Unleashed financial nationalism" Of course it has, he says that, like it is a disease something to destroy.)
And fourth, as we have seen the crisis has driven an historic change in the framework of global governance. In my view this transformation was overdue. But there are two immediate reasons for this change. One is positive: the emerging economies are now economically and financially so important and systemically so influential that they must have a full and proper ownership of global governance. But the second reason is negative: the industrialized countries have proven particularly clumsy in their handling of global finance before the crisis at the time when their responsibility in global governance was obviously overwhelming. There was therefore no reason to confirm their exclusive prime responsibility. This calls for the industrialized countries to be now particularly irreproachable in the delivery of their present and future contribution to the stability and prosperity of the global economy within the new, more inclusive framework.
( "This calls for industrialized countries to be irreproachable"? Who the Hell are you to tell us our business. This is total bullshit, I can't speak for all countries but here in Canada, we will decide for ourselves what is right or wrong, and I hope all industrialized countries will do the same. For if they don't the free market will decide your fate.)
Thanks for reading. I may edit later. Ran out of time.