| QUOTE |
| Introduction Humanity is on the verge of entering into the most tumultuous period in our history. The prospects of a global depression, the likes of which have never been seen before; a truly global war, on a scale never before imagined; and societal collapse, for which nations of the world are building totalitarian police states to control populations; are increasing by the day. The major global trend forecasters are sounding the alarms on economic depression, war, a return to fascism and a total reorganization of society. Through crisis, we are seeing the reorganization of the global political economy, and the transformation of capitalism into a totalitarian capitalist world government. Capitalism has never stayed the same through its history; it has always changed and will continue to do so. Its changes are explained and analyzed through political-economic theory, both mainstream theory and critical. The changes are undertaken over years, decades and centuries. The next phase of capitalism is one in which the world moves to a state-controlled economic system, much like China, of totalitarian capitalism. The global political economy itself is being reorganized into a world government body, consisting of one center of global power where the socio-political-economic power of the world is centralized in one institution. This is not a conspiracy theory; it is a reality. Nor is this a subject confined to the realm of “internet conspiracy theorists,” but in fact, the concept of world government originates and evolves throughout the history of capitalism and the global political economy. Mainstream and critical political-economic theory has addressed the concept of world government for centuries. The notion of a world government has such a long history, as the forces driving the world into such a structure intertwine with the history of the modern global political economy itself. The purpose of this report is to examine the history of the global political economy in taking steps toward forming a world government, in both theory and practice. |
| QUOTE |
| Russia, Oil and Revolution By the 1870s, John D. Rockefeller’s Standard Oil Empire had a virtual monopoly over the United States, and even many foreign countries. In 1890, the King of Holland gave his blessing for the creation of an international oil company called Royal Dutch Oil Company, which was mainly founded to refine and sell kerosene from Indonesia, a Dutch colony. Also in 1890, a British company was founded with the intended purpose of shipping oil, the Shell Transport and Trading Company, and it “began transporting Royal Dutch oil from Sumatra to destinations everywhere,” and eventually, “the two companies merged to become Royal Dutch Shell.”[1] Russia entered into the Industrial Revolution later than any other large country and empire of its time. By the 1870s, “Russia’s oil fields, including those in Baku, were challenging Standard Oil’s supremacy in Europe. Russia’s ascendancy in natural resources disrupted the strategic balance of power in Europe and troubled Britain.” Britain thus attempted to begin oil explorations in the Middle East, specifically in Persia (Iran), first through Baron Julius de Reuter, the founder of Reuters News Service, who gained exploration rights from the Shah of Iran.[2] Reuter’s attempt at uncovering vast quantities of oil failed, and a man named William Knox D’Arcy took the lead in Persia. By the middle of the 19th century, “the Rothschilds were the richest family in the world, perhaps in all of history. |
| QUOTE |
| The Bilderberg Group and the European Union Project In 1954, the Bilderberg Group was founded in the Netherlands, which was a secretive meeting held once a year, drawing roughly 130 of the political-financial-military-academic-media elites from North America and Western Europe as “an informal network of influential people who could consult each other privately and confidentially.”[1] Regular participants include the CEOs or Chairman of some of the largest corporations in the world, oil companies such as Royal Dutch Shell, British Petroleum, and Total SA, as well as various European monarchs, international bankers such as David Rockefeller, major politicians, presidents, prime ministers, and central bankers of the world.[2] Joseph Retinger, the founder of the Bilderberg Group, was also one of the original architects of the European Common Market and a leading intellectual champion of European integration. In 1946, he told the Royal Institute of International Affairs (the British counterpart and sister organization of the Council on Foreign Relations), that Europe needed to create a federal union and for European countries to “relinquish part of their sovereignty.” Retinger was a founder of the European Movement (EM), a lobbying organization dedicated to creating a federal Europe. Retinger secured financial support for the European Movement from powerful US financial interests such as the Council on Foreign Relations and the Rockefellers.[3] However, it is hard to distinguish between the CFR and the Rockefellers, as, especially following World War II, the CFR’s main finances came from the Carnegie Corporation, Ford Foundation and most especially, the Rockefeller Foundation.[4] The Bilderberg Group acts as a “secretive global think-tank,” with an original intent to “to link governments and economies in Europe and North America amid the Cold War.”[5] One of the Bilderberg Group’s main goals was unifying Europe into a European Union. Apart from Retinger, the founder of the Bilderberg Group and the European Movement, another ideological founder of European integration was Jean Monnet, who founded the Action Committee for a United States of Europe, an organization dedicated to promoting European integration, and he was also the major promoter and first president of the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC), the precursor to the European Common Market.[6] |
| QUOTE |
| Daniel Taylor Old-thinker News November 24, 2009 Herman Van Rompuy, the first President of the European Union, recently announced during his installment that 2009 was the first year of global governance. Indeed, 2009 has seen major steps towards global governance. The establishment has also taken severe blows this year, which will be discussed shortly. Pascal Lamy, Director General of the World Trade Organization and frequent attendee of secret Bilderberg meetings, sees the European Union as a testing ground for the machinery of international governance. In a speech in Italy on November 9th, Lamy stated that the EU model should be used on a global scale. Herman Van Rompuy. National sovereignty has no place in Lamy’s ideal globalist vision. Local communities, states and countries’ laws would be superseded by a regional – as is the case with the EU – or international body. Lamy points to the EU, where, “The fact that Community law takes precedence over national law. The creation of a supranational body such as the European Commission that has been given the monopoly of initiating legislation. A European Court of Justice whose decisions are binding on national judges.” This governance structure – along with the EU Presidency – is now possible after the recent ratification of the Lisbon Treaty, which, according to the Wall Street Journal, means that “…individual countries will have a harder time blocking EU legislation.” Pascal Lamy admits that global governance is an abstract and distant idea. Historically, especially with the United States and its libertarian roots, governance is local and familiar with the people and their needs. He states, “In sum, the specific challenge of legitimacy in global governance is to deal with the perceived too-distant, non-accountable and non-directly challengeable decision-making at the international level.” Ultimately, Lamy sees the United Nations playing a central role in global governance, with the G20 and other international groups reporting directly to the “parliament” of the UN. This beginning stage, according to Lamy, will eventually condense into a solid world government. “Menace of a new war” Global and regional governance faces another problem, specifically the fact that without the perception of an outside threat the coherence of the system falls apart. Lamy states, “The anthropological dimension of supranationality has probably been underestimated. Once the imminence of the menace of a new war has disappeared from our horizon, it is as if the glue that holds Europe together as a community will also disappear. As if there were no common myths, dreams and aspirations.” Lamy goes on to admit that, “…We are witnessing a growing distance between European public opinions and the European project.” Despite popular resistance, the establishment is continuing its agenda. Outside of war, global warming hysteria is, as the 1991 Club of Rome report The First Global Revolution proposed, a unifying threat – or perhaps more appropriately a unifying myth, as Lamy stated – that the global government needs to maintain any veil of legitimacy. The Club of Rome report states, “In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill…. All these dangers are caused by human intervention… The real enemy, then, is humanity itself.” Herman Van Rompuy has stated that the upcoming Copenhagen climate change treaty “…is another step towards the global management of our planet.” Additionally, the anthropogenic global warming theory will give the global government a taxing mechanism on a world-wide scale. Amidst this sobering news, there is hope. Recently, shocking e-mails from the England based Climate Research Unit were hacked. They reveal that leading global warming scientists worked together to actively block “climate deniers” from having papers published. Most shockingly, they show that the science behind global warming was in fact manipulated by these scientists to fit their agenda. These revelations are devastating to the entire push for carbon taxes and global governance to combat the boogey man threat of man-made global warming. The establishment is moving forward, but not without resistance. |
