The Reasons We Fight The New World Order

by Brandon Smith

“Countless people … will hate the new world order … and will die protesting against it.” — H.G. Wells, The New World Order (1940)

Throughout our lives and throughout our culture, we are conditioned to rally around concepts of false division. We are led to believe that Democrats and Republicans are separate and opposing parties, yet they are actually two branches of the same political-control mechanism. We are led to believe that two nations such as the United States and Russia are geopolitical enemies, when, in fact, they are two puppet governments under the dominance of the same international financiers. Finally, we are told that the international bankers themselves are somehow separated by borders and philosophies, when the reality is all central banks answer to a singular authority: the Bank Of International Settlements (BIS).

We are regaled with stories of constant conflict and division. Yet the truth is there is only one battle that matters, only one battle that has ever mattered: the battle between those people who seek to control others and those people who simply wish to be left alone.

The “New World Order” is a concept created not in the minds of “conspiracy theorists” but in the minds of those who seek to control others. These are the self-appointed elite who fancy themselves grandly qualified to determine the destiny of every man, woman and child at the expense of individual freedom and self-determination. In this article, I would like to examine the nature of our war with the elite and why their theories on social engineering are illogical, inadequate and, in many cases, malicious and destructive.

The ‘Greater Good’

I have always found it fascinating that while elitists and NWO champions constantly proclaim that morality is relative and that conscience is not inherent, somehow they are the ones who possess the proper definition of the “greater good.” If “good” is in all cases relative, then wouldn’t the “greater good” also be entirely relative? This inconsistency in their reasoning does not seem to stop them from forcing the masses through propaganda or violence to accept their version of better judgment.

As many psychologists and anthropologists (including Carl Jung and Steven Pinker) have proven over decades of study, moral compass and conscience are not mere products of environment; they are inborn ideals outside of the realm of environmental influences. The greater good is inherently and intuitively felt by most people. Whether one listens to this voice of conscience is up to the individual.

It is no accident that NWO elites end up contradicting themselves by claiming morality to be meaningless while pronouncing their personal morality to be pure. In order to obtain power over others, they must first convince member of the public that they are empty vessels without meaning or direction. They must convince the masses to ignore their inner voice of conscience. Only then will the public sacrifice freedoms to purchase answers they don’t really need from elites who don’t really have them.

Collectivism

I don’t claim to know what ideology would make a perfect society, and I certainly don’t know the exact solutions needed to get there. What I do know, though, is that no one else knows either. Whenever anyone takes a stage to announce that only he has the answers to the world’s problems, I cannot help but be suspicious of his motives. Rarely, if ever, do I hear these people suggest that more liberty and more individualism will make a better future. Instead, their solution always entails less freedom, more control and more force in order to mold society towards their vision.

The utopia offered by the power elite invariably demands a collectivist mindset that the individual must give up his self-determination and independence so the group can survive and thrive. The problem is no society, culture or collective can exist without the efforts and contributions of individuals. Therefore, the liberty and prosperity of the individual is far more important than the safety or even existence of the group.

The elites understand this fact, which is why they do reserve some individuality (for their own tiny circle).

No matter the guise presented — whether it be socialism, communism, fascism or some amalgamation of each — the goal is always the same: collectivism and slavery for the masses and unrestrained gluttony for the oligarchs.

The Philosophy Of Force

If your idea of a better society is a good and rational one, you should not need to use force in order to get people to accept it. Only intrinsically destructive ideas require the use of force to frighten the public into compliance. The NWO is an idea that relies entirely on force.

Globalization has been consistently sold to us as part of the natural progression of mankind, yet this “natural progression” is always advanced through the use of lies, manipulation, fear and violence. The NWO concept is one of complete centralization, a centralization that cannot be achieved without the use of terror, for who would support the creation of a malicious global power authority unless he was terrorized into doing so?

The only morally acceptable use of force is the use of force to defend against attack. As the NWO relentlessly presses forward its attack on our freedoms, we, the defenders, are labeled “violent extremists” if we refuse to go along quietly. The NWO’s dependency on force to promote its values makes it an inherently flawed methodology derived from ignorance and psychopathy, rather than wisdom and truth.

Dishonesty As Policy

As with the use of violence, the use of lies to achieve success automatically poisons whatever good may have been had through one’s efforts. The elites commonly shrug off this logic by convincing each other that there is such a thing as a “noble lie” (both Saul Alinsky and Leo Strauss, the gatekeepers of the false left/right paradigm, promoted the use of “noble lies”) and that the masses need to be misled so that they can be fooled into doing what is best for themselves and the world. This is, of course, a sociopathic game of self-aggrandizement.

Lies are rarely, if ever, exploited by people who want to make the lives of other men better; lies are used by people who want to make their own lives better at the expense of others. Add to this the egomaniacal assertion that the elites are lying for “our own good” when they are actually only out to elevate their power, and what you get is a stereotypical abusive relationship on a global scale.

Methodologies that have legitimate benefits to mankind deliberately seek truth and do not need to hide behind a veil of misinformation and misdirection. If a methodology requires secrecy, occultism and deceit in order to establish itself in a culture, then it is most likely a negative influence on that culture, not a positive one.

The Hands Of The Few

Why does humanity need a select elite at all? What purpose does this oligarchy really serve? Is centralized power really as efficient and practical as it is painted to be? Or is it actually a hindrance to mankind and an obstacle in our quest to better ourselves? Champions of the NOW argue that global governance is inevitable and that sovereignty in any form is the cause of all our ills. However, I find when I look back at the finer points of history (the points they don’t teach you in college textbooks), the true cause of most of the world’s ills is obviously the existence of elitist groups.

The “efficiency” of centralization is useful only to those at the top of the pyramid, because it generally stands on a vast maze of impassable bureaucracy. It has to. No hyper-condensed authority structure can survive if the citizenry is not made dependent on it. Centralization makes life harder for everyone by removing our ability to provide our own essentials and make our own choices. That is to say, centralization removes all alternative options from the system, until the only easy path left is to bow down to the establishment.

I have never seen a solid example of centralization of power resulting in a better society or happier people. I have also never come across a select group of leaders intelligent enough and compassionate enough to oversee and micromanage the intricate workings of the whole of the Earth. There is no use for the elite, so one must ask why we keep them around.

The Opposite View

Arguing over what should be done about the state of the world is a fruitless endeavor until one considers what should be done about the state of his own life. As long as men are stricken by bias, selfish desire and lack of awareness, they will never be able to determine what is best for other people. The opposing philosophy to the NWO, the philosophy of the Liberty Movement, holds that no one has the right to impose his particular version of a perfect society on anyone else. As soon as someone does, he has committed a grievous attack against individual liberty — an attack that must be answered.

Our answer is simply that the people who want to control others be removed from positions of control and that the people who want to be left alone just be left alone. Association and participation should always be voluntary; otherwise, society loses value. This is not anarchy in the sense that consequence is removed. Rather, the rights of the individual become paramount; and the liberties of the one take precedence over the ever vaporous demands of some abstract group.

The only reason for any government to exist is to safeguard individual freedom. Period. The original intent of America’s Founding Fathers was to establish a Nation that fostered this ideal. When government or oligarchy steps outside the bounds of this mandate, it is no longer providing the service it was originally designed for; and it must be dismantled. Unfortunately, it is a universal rule that uncompromising tyranny must often be met with uncompromising revolution.

When a new system arises that cannibalizes the old, enslaves our future, uses aggression against us and mutilates our founding principles in the name of arbitrary progress, that new system must be defied and ultimately destroyed. The NWO ideology represents one of the most egregious crimes against humanity of all time, posing in drag as our greatest hope. It is based, fundamentally, on everything that makes life terrible for the common man and everything our inherent conscience fights against.

We would be far better served as a species if we were to turn our back on the NWO altogether and move swiftly in the opposite direction. Imagine what tomorrow would be like if there were no controllers, no statists, no despots and no philosopher kings. Imagine a tomorrow where people respect the natural-born rights of others. Imagine a tomorrow where people’s irrational fears are not allowed to inhibit other people’s freedoms. Imagine a tomorrow where interactions between citizens and government are rare or nonexistent. Imagine if we could live our days in peace, independently building our own destinies, in which our successes and failures are our own, rather than the property of the collective. It may not be a perfect world, or a utopia, but I suspect it would be a much better place than we live in today.

The Collapse of America - A Plan Decades in the Making

David Risselada

While many people are awakening to the Obama administration and their attempts to undermine our national sovereignty, it must be stated that this has been an ongoing effort for many, many decades. Barrack Obama is merely a tool selected to get an already conditioned population to accept the final stages of a plan that will see the United States surrender its sovereignty and merge into a global governing structure where she will no longer be respected as a world super power, but viewed merely as another third world nation that is morally equivalent to all others. There are three main pillars of our society and culture that need to be changed from the inside in order for this transformation to take place; immigration, education and the military. It is hard to argue, even for those who adamantly oppose any idea of conspiracy theories, that these three elements of our society have not been radically affected in recent years. This article will offer a brief analysis into the events taking place and the historical roots behind them. This is indeed a planned collapse, and to be calling it out for what it is now is indeed too little too late.

As the crisis along our border escalates, we are hearing more and more on the whole situation being a planned event to precipitate the total collapse of our nation. Even congressmen are coming out and calling this a deliberate application of the Cloward & Piven strategy. For those who may not know, the Cloward & Piven strategy was the work of two Sociology Professors at Columbia University, Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven, designed to organize the nation's poor and minorities into a power base from which the country, through the democratic process, could be converted into a socialist state. One of the key components of this strategy was the idea of overwhelming the nation's welfare system to the point where it collapses, and the government would then be forced to adapt socialism.

It's obvious beyond any doubt that Barrack Hussein Obama is implementing this strategy; after all he did attend Columbia University and was likely educated by Frances Fox Piven. In my article, "President Obama, Frances Fox Piven, and voter registration schemes" I discussed Piven and her efforts to organize a voter registration drive aimed at minorities by teaching them they were oppressed. I also mentioned one of my own professors, an admitted socialist mind you, who was likely educated by Piven as he had attended The Columbia University School of Social Work. In short, people who are calling the border crisis a deliberate attempt to undermine America and collapse her financial system are correct; however, from the perspective of a writer who has been trying to bring many things to people's attention, they are a day late and a dollar short as this is only one small aspect of many moving parts put in motion a long time ago.

In my article "Amnesty and the Immigration Act of 1965," I discussed the origins of the immigration crisis we are now facing and how it was nothing but a plot to secure more voters for the Democrat Party. This was based on the ideas of Marxism and the teachings of Antonio Gramsci, who taught that America's culture would have to be changed incrementally from within. The immigration act of 1965 was signed into law by Democrat President Lyndon B. Johnson. This is the same president who promised Americas black communities free welfare for their votes. Lyndon B. Johnson is remembered in history as saying "I'll have those ni**ers voting democratic for the next two hundred years." He believed that if he could convince America's black population centers that the government would take care of them, and they were deserving of this because of their "victimhood" status, he could secure their vote for generations to come. This was a surprisingly effective technique as black Americans continue to vote democrat even though they remain impoverished in districts controlled by Democrats for decades.

While Lyndon B. Johnson signed the civil rights act into law in an effort to secure the black vote, the truth is, he opposed it as senate majority leader when introduced by Republican President Dwight Eisenhower. He did this specifically for the purpose of giving the illusion that it was the Democrat Party that supported civil rights, even though the majority of Democrats under the Johnson administration still opposed the bill. If it would not have had the Republican support it did, it would have never passed into law.

What does this have to do with immigration? At the time America's immigration laws were based on a quota system, meaning that immigrants from any part of the world were allowed in based on the number of existing immigrants already in country from that part of the world. This was done in an effort to maintain national identity and ensure that people with useful skills and a desire to assimilate into our culture would be the ones to immigrate here. This meant that most of the people who were immigrating here were of European ancestry and just as is the case today, people referred to this as a racist system.

People began to argue that immigration to the United States was a human right and that because we as a nation have stolen most of our resources and land people were entitled to immigrate here. There were many fallacies in this narrative because the U.S. had allowed many thousands of Asians into the country to escape communist oppression during the Vietnam War, and we have allowed many refugees from all over the world to relocate to the United States in an effort to escape tyranny. With all of this being said, the 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act eliminated the quota system and replaced it with one where immigration has been open to all corners of the world. In fact, the bill allows for the exponential growth of immigration from the third world and likely led to the passage of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, in which Ronald Reagan granted amnesty to nearly four million illegal immigrants. There was little doubt with the passage of the Immigration Act of 1965 that it would forever change the demographics of The United States.

While it is obvious that the immigration crisis is contributing to a "planned collapse" or our country, it is not the only event put in motion to accomplish this goal. As the nation awakens to the danger that "Common Core" education represents, they would do themselves well by realizing that this is the final push of an education curriculum a century in the making. Again, it all goes back to the ideas of Marx and the teachings of Gramsci. Antonio Gramsci taught that America would only accept socialism incrementally, and in order to implement incremental change, the institutions must be infiltrated by "Change agents." Leftists have had control of our education system for decades, and as I wrote in my article "A truth we have to accept," the push to turn America into a socialist nation started decades ago.

Unfortunately, in this case the truth is definitely something most people would not want to accept; however, it is proof positive that both political parties in this nation are guilty of undermining its constitution and national sovereignty. The communists believed that world peace can only be achieved when the world accepted communism as the ultimate social structure. Lenin often spoke of a communist world government.

What many don't realize is our government's role in allowing the communists to infiltrate our nation, and it all started with something called "The Reese Committee." The Reese Committee was the investigation of U.S. taxpayer money being used to fund organizations and societies that were pushing for the merging of the Soviet Union and the United States to form a global government. At the same time, agreements were being signed by Republican President Dwight Eisenhower to break down the barriers between the Soviet Union and the U.S. in an effort to get the U.S. to accept communism (so to say) as a moral equivalent of the west's way of life. Because the Soviet Union and the U.S. were considered allies in the efforts to defeat Adolph Hitler, great lengths were undertaken to hide the truth about communism and America's role in covering up these truths. That's a whole other story. However, a better understanding of the communist mindset can be developed by reading "The Communist Peace Offensive."

According to Charlotte Iserbyt, whistle blower and author of "The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America," Ronald Reagan also signed such agreements with the Soviet Union where they would have influence over our education system. This was done for the purpose of achieving world peace. While many would refuse to believe this because Ronald Reagan is known as being one of the most conservative presidents we have had, how else would you explain a modern generation that for all practical purposes appears to be begging for communism? Just as thousands of immigrants did not make it across thousands of miles of treacherous terrain without some kind of assistance, neither did the communists successfully infiltrate our education system without being welcomed.

So far we discussed immigration and education as being the pillars of America's destruction. There is, however, one more institution that needs to be thoroughly destroyed before America is ripe for total transformation. This is one institution that Barrack Obama has been very successful in dismantling almost single-handedly. However, once again, the precedence for this was established long ago and Obama is merely implementing the strategy. This institution is the U.S. military, and over the past couple of years we have watched Barrack Obama relieve hundreds of high ranking commanders from their duties as they represent a threat to his agenda. Understand that this is not his agenda; he is merely carrying it out. It was put in place decades ago by the same communist forces infiltrating every other aspect of our society.

To truly come to terms with this you must understand that America, and her Judeo-Christian heritage is the last remaining power able to keep the communists from establishing total control over the world. This is why her education system was infiltrated, this is why we are flooded with third immigrants accustomed to collectivism and this is why our military needs to be disarmed.

In the Communist Peace Offensive, it is evident that the Soviets intended to give the illusion that an America willing to disarm itself was an America that showed a superior, moral strength, and that this was the only way world peace could be achieved. They have gone to great efforts to portray the American military as imperialistic and oppressive, and they have been very successful in these efforts as many Americans despise the military. In order to understand this better you should read public law 87-297 "The Arms Control and Disarmament Act" State Department publication 7277. This was signed into law in 1961 by President John F. Kennedy and carried out by every president since. This law calls for the gradual elimination of Americas Armed Forces to the point where we no longer have a national Army, Navy or Air Force. According to Bernadine Smith, this cannot be fully accomplished until they have completely disarmed the citizenry because they know full well we will never accept the dismantling of our military as it is the only thing that protects our national sovereignty. When they finally outlaw civilian weapons, we will know we are in the final stages of their plan to completely disarm our military and merge us with a one world communist order.