Thread: The 'New World Order' Conspiracy Theory

Is it real, is it a conspiracy theory at best? I thought I'd post this up for discussion/debate.

Stan Jones C SPAN exposes The New World Order - YouTube

Originally Posted by Vulgar`

Is it real, is it a conspiracy theory at best? I thought I'd post this up for discussion/debate.

Stan Jones C SPAN exposes The New World Order - YouTube

Now that we are into crazy conspiracies.

Space elevator - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is actually in development, and it could change the order of the world as we know it.

Basically, Imagine a ring of solar panels orbiting around earth (solar energy in space is very efficient since it doesn't get diffused by the atmosphere).

Orbital bombardments would become a viable, powerful weapon that would be extremely difficult to counter. Space tourism would bring huge rates of income per year, and the technology that could be developed in 0G environments is potentially world changing, not to mention the tech used to make the elevator.

In a time of energy and resource crisis, who will control the world? The ones that have this giant wire to the heavens. Guess who's making the technologies to build it? Japan.

The scary part is that this space elevator can only be built somewhere with 0º latitude, which means that if it where to be built on land, it could only be on Guatemala, the African, India or the Philippines. That's 4 places dangerously close to the current economic powers.

If the US where to merge with Canada and Mexico, Guatemala would be nothing more than a small bug to step on in order to get the perfect location, while China has India and Japan has the Philippines nearby. The EU would build theirs in Africa, and suddenly we have a world made of a few giant countries.

Well, some of the stuff he's talking about surrounding economic zones banding together to form stronger ties is true. I don't know if it's all being directed by some communist agenda, or if it's centered around eroding our rights.

If anyone would be interested in eroding our rights, it'd be corporations. Communism is more about community and that entails certain rights and obligations for everyone to everyone else. Capitalism is eff your neighbour, repeat as necessary.

NWO (conspiracies) are in so many different shapes an sizes. Some are more sane, others are off the planet.

Fact : There's some groups out there who do envision everybody being controlled by 'their' people (not talking US superpower here).
Fact : There's some individuals (eg George Soros) that fund groups to try to enforce their will across the world.

However some so-called NWO claims are pretty dumb.

EG : George Bush & Kerry? are 15th cousins and 13th/17th descendants (from memory - generation count may be out) of European royalty; and it's all a conspiracy stopping non-royal bloodlines from taking governmental posts.
Fact : If there's 4 people to a generation, then you have a numerical 1 million family members by the 10th generation & 1 billion by the 15th. Of course there'll be a lot of crossover, but 15 generations ago, there may have only been 1 billion people on the planet. So no conspiracy there.

Originally Posted by Capulet

If anyone would be interested in eroding our rights, it'd be corporations. Communism is more about community and that entails certain rights and obligations for everyone to everyone else. Capitalism is eff your neighbour, repeat as necessary.

Or Communism is more about making you a slave 'for the greater parasitic good', and Capitalism is about gaining the most off your own back.
Communism can also be seen as the biggest corporation possible. And eroding your rights would be correct, for you have no individual rights under Communism; for individual doesn't exist.
Just saying. Btw : Lenin/Trotsky/Stalin Communism was all about creating a neverending Communist NWO.

Just saying.

Originally Posted by Rustgold

Or Communism is more about making you a slave 'for the greater parasitic good', and Capitalism is about gaining the most off your own back.
Communism can also be seen as the biggest corporation possible. And eroding your rights would be correct, for you have no individual rights under Communism; for individual doesn't exist.
Just saying. Btw : Lenin/Trotsky/Stalin Communism was all about creating a neverending Communist NWO.

Just saying.

And what do you think American "Capitalism" is about? The funny thing is, neither Russian Communism or American Capitalism are pure implementations of either system.

But you do have individual rights and obligations in Communism. From each according to their ability, to each according to their needs. The "to each according to their needs" sounds like individual rights to me. You have a right to a home, food, education, medical care, work. The individual does exist, they just have obligations to society they need to fulfill. This is a big digression though.

Every major power, especially the US, tries to influence the world to match their economic and political goals. To think one is succeeding behind the scenes seems a little far fetched.

These are the highlights:

"What I am about to say is FACT."

"The secret organizations of the world power elite are no longer secret. They have planned and are now leading us into a one world communist government."

"That Union [the European Union] started with trade agreements, then a common currency, and now a European parliament that is feverishly passing laws that override the laws of the member nations. A constitution was drafted but rejected by a few of those member nations but never mind...they implemented it anyway."

"The NAFTA section of the commerce dept. is busy drafting laws and regulations for a North American Union, a Union of Canada, America and Mexico...we will have a new currency: the Amero and a new constitution modeled on the Soviet Union's constitution [my emphasis], our rights will not be unalienable but they will be granted by government, who can also take them away."

Then he starts with the predictions...

"One sign that this is our future is the plans for a superhighway from Southern Mexico through America and into Canada."

"You will have a national ID card with a frequency chip in it. That's already law in America and will be implemented May 2000."

"You will not be able to move freely."

"The strongest, freest nation in the history of mankind will be averaged [sic] into world communism."

What more could you expect from a libertarian cooped up in Montana?

That video from October of 2006 is seriously out of date but nonetheless raises some interesting questions.

It was Emperor Augustus who first tried to unify Europe, and his plan worked fairly well for a few hundred years. Charlemagne tried, as did Napoleon and Hitler, all without lasting success, though the ghost of Charlemagne's empire was still around in 1914. So the idea of a unified Europe did not originate with the European Union, as Stan Jones would know if he'd ever read a book. Are there books in Montana?

He would also understand that no unified world communist conspiracy has ever existed except in the minds of John Foster Dulles, his paranoid brother Allen, and the 20th Century's poster boy nutcase Joe McCarthy. Every communist country and every communist leader has had, and continues to have, a different idea of what communism is supposed to be.

The one good idea he talked about is that of a North American Union made up of Mexico, the U.S., and Canada. That has a great deal of economic potential and could solve a number of social problems. All three would have to join for it to work, though, and I seriously doubt Canada would be willing to take part. If such a union were established then a logical extension, another old idea, would be to include Cuba, but Miami would burn to the ground before that could happen.

Citing a few legitimate references and providing some hard evidence would go a long way in leading people to believe what Stan Jones and others like him have to say. But hard evidence is difficult to provide when all you have to back up what you say is a vivid imagination.

I don't trust a politician who still says 'most worst' in a prepared speech.

In Montana, 'more worser' is the comparative. 'Most worstist' is the superlative and is the form he should have used.

Originally Posted by Capulet

If anyone would be interested in eroding our rights, it'd be corporations. Communism is more about community and that entails certain rights and obligations for everyone to everyone else. Capitalism is eff your neighbour, repeat as necessary.

I doubt that statement would fly to the millions Stalin shipped off to Siberia, the millions that just disappeared off the face of the earth.

But Stalin was not a communist.

Stalin flew the flag of Marx, but his political philosophy was the same as that of the Romanovs, only crueler.

What Marx envisioned, and what has never been tried on any large scale, was what he called the 'dictatorship of the proletariat', an unfortunate term which many have taken to mean that someone must be a dictator over the working class. Marx meant just the opposite, but it's necessary to read what he wrote and not what people say he wrote to understand his meaning.

Marx wanted the workers, collectively and democratically, to be the dictator class. The ruling power in society should be in the hands of the working men and women who produce the wealth of that society.

Pure communism has never worked on any large scale. Pure capitalism, likewise, has never worked the way its believers say it should. What does work, what has been proven to work, is the kind of socialism that balances the needs of everyone in society. Socialism works, however, only when certain requirements are met, such as a universally high level of education and broad public participation in the political system. The Scandinavian countries are the best examples.

The problem with people such as Stan Jones is their deliberate and arogant ignorance. Such people do not read the Communist Manifesto, will tell you proudly they've never read it, but will talk all day about communism. They believe what they want to believe. They have closed minds and there is no point trying to convince them to start looking beyond their cherished beliefs to see what else the world has on offer.

Originally Posted by Robinjazz

I doubt that statement would fly to the millions Stalin shipped off to Siberia, the millions that just disappeared off the face of the earth.

If you are going to inaccurately characterize Stalin's tyranny as a reflection on Marxism rather than the ruthless and capricious character of the man himself (and the specific circumstances surrounding the 1917 Revolution in Russia), than it makes sense for me to vilify the conglomerates of IG Farben, which developed and produced the Zyklon B used in Nazi death camps, and Krupp, which produced tanks and shells for the Nazi regime using slave labor, as exemplars of corporate capitalism.

Try reading about communism before you use it as a strawman. Start with Marx's Communist Manifesto and end with Trotsky's Revolution Betrayed.

The European Union is kind of like the United States of America to me.

Originally Posted by garza

But Stalin was not a communist.

Stalin flew the flag of Marx, but his political philosophy was the same as that of the Romanovs, only crueler.

What Marx envisioned, and what has never been tried on any large scale, was what he called the 'dictatorship of the proletariat', an unfortunate term which many have taken to mean that someone must be a dictator over the working class. Marx meant just the opposite, but it's necessary to read what he wrote and not what people say he wrote to understand his meaning.

Marx wanted the workers, collectively and democratically, to be the dictator class. The ruling power in society should be in the hands of the working men and women who produce the wealth of that society.

Pure communism has never worked on any large scale. Pure capitalism, likewise, has never worked the way its believers say it should. What does work, what has been proven to work, is the kind of socialism that balances the needs of everyone in society. Socialism works, however, only when certain requirements are met, such as a universally high level of education and broad public participation in the political system. The Scandinavian countries are the best examples.

The problem with people such as Stan Jones is their deliberate and arogant ignorance. Such people do not read the Communist Manifesto, will tell you proudly they've never read it, but will talk all day about communism. They believe what they want to believe. They have closed minds and there is no point trying to convince them to start looking beyond their cherished beliefs to see what else the world has on offer.

"Empathy" was the word I sought when I read "Communism was more about communtiny." I tried to envision what it must have felt like to be ripped away from one's family to die a slow, horrific death. Now, if I were one of those men sent off to die the slow death, and someone asked me, "How do you like your new community?" I don't know whether I would have laughed or cried myself to death.

Originally Posted by Capulet

If anyone would be interested in eroding our rights, it'd be corporations. Communism is more about community and that entails certain rights and obligations for everyone to everyone else. Capitalism is eff your neighbour, repeat as necessary.

Originally Posted by Edgewise

If you are going to inaccurately characterize Stalin's tyranny as a reflection on Marxism rather than the ruthless and capricious character of the man himself[/I].

So this is what people should accept: Communism is a "good system" and any faults within it should be blamed on character;however, Capitalism is a "bad system" and all faults within it should be blamed on the system.

Well, people can't buy that. Because just as Stalin gave "Communism" a bad name with his ruthless character, so do greedy individuals give "Capitalism" a bad name with their never- ending appetite for wealth.

You can't put the flaws of Communism on a man, yet try to put the flaws of Capitalism on the system. Who's effing his neighbor? Some greedy man who has two hands and two feet just as Stalin had.