• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Politicians who believe in a 'New World Order'

BmanMcfly

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 3, 2008
Messages
12,761
Reaction score
2,321
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
YouTube - Invisible Empire: Part 13 (credits) [HD]

Ok, I know this is from the credits of a movie, but this saved me from having to link 20-30 videos all saying the same things from the same people.

No, not all the people discussing the New World Order are supportive of it, but the fact that it's being discussed openly (mostly FOR the idea).

I'm not necessarily starting this thread as a discussion of the actual film whose credits are rolling, however if that's what's desired the rest of the film is up on youtube, and can be linked.

The question is :

If all these politicians (and easily hundreds more) are discussing a new world order, What are the implications of this 'new order'? Who does it most benefit? Why is it necessary? What will it look like?

Can it really still be called a 'conspiracy THEORY' when it's being so openly discussed?

Thanks.
 

Aunt Spiker

Cheese
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 20, 2009
Messages
28,433
Reaction score
16,986
Location
Sasnakra
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
Could be referring to a few different notions.

"New World Order" is a few different things.

The most common is using this term to describe when the world changes or is altered by a war, political shift in power or something of that nature. It's been used by various people to describe post-wars (WWI, Cold War and WWII) - after which the world political compass shifted. Along this line it has also been used to note when we became a nuclear-world, for example. Using this thought you could apply this to the era in which firearms were invented, altering politics, and the discovery of America and so on so forth - any time a new progression or advancement changed the way countries deal with eachother.

The Conspiracy Theory with this term centers around the idea of a world-wide government or, a multinational government somewhat like the European Union but more complete. The first of these two (the world-wide government) would be akin to Star Trek, actually, in theory.
 
Last edited:

BmanMcfly

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 3, 2008
Messages
12,761
Reaction score
2,321
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Well, I was hoping to see a few more responses before chiming in... noone's commented.

Could be referring to a few different notions.

"New World Order" is a few different things.

The most common is using this term to describe when the world changes or is altered by a war, political shift in power or something of that nature. It's been used by various people to describe post-wars (WWI, Cold War and WWII) - after which the world political compass shifted. Along this line it has also been used to note when we became a nuclear-world, for example. Using this thought you could apply this to the era in which firearms were invented, altering politics, and the discovery of America and so on so forth - any time a new progression or advancement changed the way countries deal with eachother.
The term itself has been attributed as far back as Alexander the Great, whose ultimate goal was to create a 'new order to the world', his order.

The Conspiracy Theory with this term centers around the idea of a world-wide government or, a multinational government somewhat like the European Union but more complete. The first of these two (the world-wide government) would be akin to Star Trek, actually, in theory.
That's not quite accurate of the 'in depth' 'conspiracy theory'... Look at the Olympic rings, the symbolism of these rings is the 5 continents linked together. There are different 'arms' of the global political structure that are already essentially in place. The UN and the IMF / World Bank are the most known of these 'attempts' at a global governance system. Simply, they haven't been able to garner the support required to have enough member nations surrender their sovereignty to this system.

So, the way it will work will be much like the european unions creation, there's already the treaties signed for the north american union (Canada, US and Mexico), also the creation of an asian, african and south american union. In each of these cases a portion of each member nations sovereignty is surrendered to a higher governemtn with less connection to the individuals. From these various unions and less representation of the people, those in charge of these various unions (like in european union, will be unelected) and they will surrender the sovereignty of each of these unions to the UN (or whatever the name might be changed to)... this will allow the world bank to be the global taxing and currency arm to create a world currency... you'll still have your regional currency kept in tact, but it will be tied to it's value relative to the international monetary unit.

Now, I agree that if we could build a global republic, it would look very much like a 'Star fleet' type of organization... and we as a species can go off into the stars.

Here's the caveat : The majority of the nations around the world are NOT republics, or even democracies. Most countries are controlled by some sort of dictator / tyrant. Now, if you take a room that's full of tyrants and petty dictators, and they are trying to agree on a global governance structure... shake them all up, and it's VERY unlikely that you will wind up with a peace loving humanitarian world government.... ESPECIALLY when the majority of the planning of this world government is being planned in secret.

Think about it, even in the most overt discussions for globalization : The G# meetings is a prime example, where any civilian within a 10block radius of the meeting is hosed down, beaten, pepper sprayed, tear gassed and occassionally killed... MEANWHILE the media gets to cover the 'topics of discussion' and the 'plans', but then gets shut behind another set of closed doors where actual discussions take place.
 

mike2810

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
24,136
Reaction score
8,726
Location
arizona
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Here's the caveat : The majority of the nations around the world are NOT republics, or even democracies. Most countries are controlled by some sort of dictator / tyrant. Now, if you take a room that's full of tyrants and petty dictators, and they are trying to agree on a global governance structure... shake them all up, and it's VERY unlikely that you will wind up with a peace loving humanitarian world government.... ESPECIALLY when the majority of the planning of this world government is being planned in secret.

Think about it, even in the most overt discussions for globalization : The G# meetings is a prime example, where any civilian within a 10block radius of the meeting is hosed down, beaten, pepper sprayed, tear gassed and occassionally killed... MEANWHILE the media gets to cover the 'topics of discussion' and the 'plans', but then gets shut behind another set of closed doors where actual discussions take place.
I agree with your statement about dictators. IMO, some politicians talk about nwo as a means to express how the economic health of most nations are tide internationally now. This was so much the case 100 years ago.

As far as your last paragraph regarding the "G" meetings is a bit shifted. It has been reported for years that the demonstrations were done to try and distrupt the meetings. Reports I've seen is the demonstrators became out of control before any police action. Lets not go down the path of the news is controlled by the nwo or govt. I can agree that it would be interesting to see the inside working of the meetings instead of sound bites given after the fact. As far as why the meeting access is controlled, think of the poliitcal leaders that are their and the security that is needed to protect them.
 

BmanMcfly

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 3, 2008
Messages
12,761
Reaction score
2,321
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I agree with your statement about dictators. IMO, some politicians talk about nwo as a means to express how the economic health of most nations are tide internationally now. This was so much the case 100 years ago.
Yes, that was due to the process of globalization... which has brought us such good ideas as NAFTA and GATT, also with the official forming of the european union and later the euro.

I would argue that this isn't the 'natural process' where globally nations gradually began engaging in greater trade... but rather a contrived induction of 'friendly' nations under the intention specifically. The underlying idea being that this 'new world order' would be formed first by gathering the consent of as many nations as possible (why the # after the G has been steadily on the rise)... and then once the world would be split into 'globalized' and 'rogue' nations, the remainder would be consumed through conquest.

As far as your last paragraph regarding the "G" meetings is a bit shifted. It has been reported for years that the demonstrations were done to try and distrupt the meetings. Reports I've seen is the demonstrators became out of control before any police action. Lets not go down the path of the news is controlled by the nwo or govt. I can agree that it would be interesting to see the inside working of the meetings instead of sound bites given after the fact. As far as why the meeting access is controlled, think of the poliitcal leaders that are their and the security that is needed to protect them.
I'm not going to say that you're wrong here, because it's true that those that protest these meetings have the intention to disrupt the meetings... but not to stop this process, but just to keep this process of globalization as tied to the needs and will of the people as possible instead of a process which distances government further away from accountability to the people of the member nations.

That said, it's been proven at virtually EVERY major protest like this that the 'black bloc' / anarchists had been infiltrated by police with the specific intention to attack the front line of SWAT geared officers... Providing the justification for the police to retaliate against the peaceful protestors. It's even appeared in Canadian news where the RCMP came out and admitted that infiltrating anarchist groups was "standard practise world wide".

This tactic has several prongs of advantages :
- Demonizes the whole protest as violent (whoever casts the first stone LOSES politically)
- Silences the legitimate messages of the peaceful protestors
- Creates a chilling effect where legitimate protestors are less willing to publicly voice their opinions for fear of being attacked by police
and so on...

Lastly, the REASON this has been deemed a conspiracy theory for so long... it was the tactic of plausible deniability. There are a number of examples where politicians would be confronted over a statement that they had made about the 'new world order' (equally true with various topics), and would flat out deny making that statement... who is the public going to believe, the politician or the random person in the crowd making an obscure accusation?? Now, with the advent of youtube they will attempt the same technique, and there's one example where the person had his iphone with the relevant youtube vid loaded up and played the guys own words and video.... only to see them try to backpedal. This goes to show the level of disdain that politicians have for the public. (The NEW tactic has been shifted from flat denial to a tactic akin to how one might pass gas at church... you just put it out there and hope nobody notices, re: Heraldo Rivera coming out and openly admitting that US marines are guarding the poppy fields in Afghanistan, so now, it's not a 'conspiracy theory' that the troops are helping produce the heroin... it's a GOOD thing, and if you DON"T support the troops protecting the poppies, then you don't support the millitary and are unamerican).
 

usda select

Banned
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
930
Reaction score
158
Political Leaning
Independent
Yes, that was due to the process of globalization... which has brought us such good ideas as NAFTA and GATT, also with the official forming of the european union and later the euro.

I would argue that this isn't the 'natural process' where globally nations gradually began engaging in greater trade... but rather a contrived induction of 'friendly' nations under the intention specifically. The underlying idea being that this 'new world order' would be formed first by gathering the consent of as many nations as possible (why the # after the G has been steadily on the rise)... and then once the world would be split into 'globalized' and 'rogue' nations, the remainder would be consumed through conquest.
So we invade countries that will not trade with us? And the reason for conquest would be what exactly?

That said, it's been proven at virtually EVERY major protest like this that the 'black bloc' / anarchists had been infiltrated by police with the specific intention to attack the front line of SWAT geared officers... Providing the justification for the police to retaliate against the peaceful protestors. It's even appeared in Canadian news where the RCMP came out and admitted that infiltrating anarchist groups was "standard practise world wide".

This tactic has several prongs of advantages :
- Demonizes the whole protest as violent (whoever casts the first stone LOSES politically)
- Silences the legitimate messages of the peaceful protestors
- Creates a chilling effect where legitimate protestors are less willing to publicly voice their opinions for fear of being attacked by police
and so on...
There literally is no end to your paranoia is there?
 

BmanMcfly

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 3, 2008
Messages
12,761
Reaction score
2,321
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
So we invade countries that will not trade with us?
No... world control through conquest or consent... We got Africa through consent, by giving them loans at such a ridiculous interest rate that they might pay back 50 billion on a 1billion dollar loan. Places like Iran aren't interested in that sort of system because they still think of interest rates as usury.

And the reason for conquest would be what exactly?
The same reasons the Romans conquered their neighbours 2000 years ago...

There literally is no end to your paranoia is there?
No... I said PROVEN. MANY TIMES OVER. Ottawa, Montreal, Pittsburgh, London, Geneva, Melbourne, etc. and ADMITTED TO by Montreals RCMP's.

I'm sure there's times where protestors have attacked police, but virtually EVERY time it comes out that it's police... the people are getting wise at these protests and will attempt to shut down the agents provocateurs before they have the chance to instigate.
 

LaughAtTheWorld

Custom User Title
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 24, 2010
Messages
9,642
Reaction score
3,591
Location
Seoul/Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I think every country is trying to make a new world order. Their own version.
The new world order theory is real. How can it not be when every country is trying to conquer each other?
 

BmanMcfly

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 3, 2008
Messages
12,761
Reaction score
2,321
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I think every country is trying to make a new world order. Their own version.
I agree with this, but it's more like all countries are working towards creating this new world order, but they are each vying for who will wind up controlling this world order. 'Order out of chaos'...

Or from a more 'mainstream' perspective, whenever there is financial crisis in a country it's government goes to war to take the people's minds off of their misdeeds.... and whenever there's been globally reaching financial crisis.... then the scale of the war is that much bigger. Bankers make more money in a day of war then a year of peace. Societies also go under drastic changes once the war is over, so ultimately the final phases of transitioning into this new world order will ultimately be born out of the ashes of a global scale conflict.

The new world order theory is real. How can it not be when every country is trying to conquer each other?
Once you look deeper into the new world order you start to find the groups that sit above politicians and ultimately give them their directions.... their wants only suit the wants of the people in as much as it will have the people go along with it.

Aldous Huxley is a great source of information in terms of what the goals of this 'new world order are'.... and I don't mean his fictional 'Brave New World' I mean his university speeches where he says that Orwell got it wrong, that there wouldn't be the need for such a strong armed police state because through things like drugs, genetic engineering, and chemicals in the food and water that the people would actually be made to ENJOY conditions that an outside observer might otherwise find appalling... that's to paraphrase what he discussed in 1936. And in 2010, we have fluoridated water in over 80% of locales, we have genetically modified crops grown on over 90% of North America, and about 80% of the food you buy at your grocery store has at least one (1) ingredient that falls on the GRAS (Generally Regarded As Safe) list, meaning that if it wasn't deemed poisonous in 1956 and there hasn't been any further safety testing, then the (mostly preservatives) are 'generally regarded as safe'.

At the same time, the economy is going down the crapper, homeless people are sprouting up everywhere, production is dropping to record lows, taxes are on the rise to take up more money out of peoples empty pockets.... and still a large portion of the country spends it's days watching and caring about stupid crap like what drug Lindsay Lohan is on, or which celebrity flashed their pooter, how the sports team is doing; win, lose, or draw.

It really is like described in the kids movie 'ants', "if the ants EVER realize that we (grasshoppers stealing their food) are outnumbered 1000 to 1, then our free ride is OVER."
 
Top Bottom