Welcome to life inside a New World Order

From New Dawn 188 (Jul-Aug 2021)

We knew the world was changing in radical ways, but we never thought it would happen this fast. 

In 2015, I penned a feature article for this publication entitled “Oceania Forever: Rise of the Global Police State.”1 After closely following the steady construction of a global control grid after 9/11, it was still difficult to see exactly where it was all going and why. Many of us knew the surveillance infrastructure would be permanent, and there was undoubtedly some speculation of an emerging supranational global government, but still no clear endgame in sight. 

All that changed in 2020, and many of my previous questions were answered. 

With the advent of the global pandemic, the global police state had finally received its marching orders.

Nearly a year later, in 2016, I wrote a follow-up piece in an attempt to visualise what an emerging technocracy might look and feel like – the shape of things to come, underpinned by the technocratic visions of arch globalist Zbigniew Brzezinski. That article, “Technetronic Enslavement: Life Inside the Matrix of Control,” was published in New Dawn 156 (May-June 2016). Since then, my suspicions have been validated and questions answered through the emergence of the globalists’ Great Reset agenda.

So here we are, a full eighteen months down the road of the Great Plague, and looking around we now see what life is like inside a New World Order.

No one expected it would come so fast and on such an international scale.

The shock and awe also signalled the beginning of what looks more and more like a post-democratic era – the ascendency of global fascism with cold technocratic features, orchestrated by an elite cabal of rapacious oligarchs, and remorseless bureaucrats taking their instructions from shadowy cliques of science advisors governing every conceivable aspect of our daily lives… right down to where we are allowed to travel, if we are allowed to work, what we can buy, whether our children can attend school, and even who we are allowed to meet. The level of control even extends to the mandating of masks and what experimental injections we are expected to receive in order to ‘win back our freedoms’ and return to normal life.

We’re told by our leaders that all of this is necessary and permanent, and that it’s for our safety, and the safety of the collective. The new regime is not just national, it’s global.

A New Order: Post-Covid Geopolitics

One thing became clear early on – nearly every government on the planet used the pandemic to tighten its grip on power and its domestic situation and quell any potential uprising or political opposition. Many countries have gone so far as to suspend parliament, delay elections, and impose a semi-permanent state of emergency. 

Countries more authoritarian, or with one-party systems, haven’t felt the same civil strife as many so-called democratic countries whose citizens might resist the removal of individual rights and freedoms. Still, even in those countries, the level of public compliance to public health policy edicts was almost shockingly seamless.

Certainly, in a country like China – the alleged epicentre of the pandemic – the government has managed its pandemic policies and lockdowns without too much pushback from the general population. Somewhat surprisingly, countries like the UK and others appeared to take cues from China early on, copying all of its symbolic policy moves, including the use of lockdowns to supposedly ‘stop the spread’ of the virus.

All of this comes with a very uneasy feeling. Only in preparation for war have we seen this level of rapid societal and economic reorganisation, the shuttering of institutions and services, and suspension of rights. This fact alone is worrying as countries invoked their fusion doctrines, resiliency measures, and international network routes are already prepared for an ongoing global upheaval.

One of the more disturbing features of the Western-centric narrative has been the scapegoating of China for the pandemic. Western politicians and media pundits accuse China, at the very least, of being responsible for a reckless ‘lab leak’ of an engineered coronavirus out of the Wuhan Institute of Virology, or at worst deliberately releasing a viral bioweapon that has killed three million people and devastated the global economy. Regardless of whether any of that is even remotely true, the reality is that a generation of Westerners are now conditioned to view China with suspicion, or worse, as the enemy.

A New Cold War and Return to Bipolarism

Are we being primed for a new Cold War, and if so, what would it look like?

In some ways, it would be much like the previous Cold War; a perpetual affair characterised by long-term, low-intensity conflict, both abroad (against the enemy) as well as at home (against domestic terrorism), carefully designed to hem in populations on both sides of a new global paradigm. 

Elites prefer a bipolar world rather than a multipolar one. For starters, a bipolar Cold War is much easier to physically control and administer. More crucially still is the management of intellectual and political life in a bipolar world order. During the US-led post-WWII liberal world order, political thought and philosophy were built up and maintained around a bipolar worldview and predictable power dynamics. It naturally lent itself to a fairly tight cadre of realist academics and intellectuals who fashioned the global political conversation along East vs West, and Capitalist vs Communist ideological discourse. This same intellectual syndicate, led at the time by international relations scholars like Samuel P. Huntington and Francis Fukuyama, declared “the end of history” following the disintegration of the Soviet Union in 1991. The Western liberal and free-market model had prevailed, they proclaimed, and for another few decades, the bipolarists performed a victory lap which ushered in an era led by a neoconservative and neoliberal unipolar phase of US and NATO-led domination of various global regions.

If a bipolar world order is to return, then it will likely be an Anglo-American led Western alliance vs China. And like the previous Cold War, there will be a contested or disputed zone somewhere in between that serves as a convenient ‘away’ pitch for a protracted ideological, military and proxy conflict between these two great powers. One way to maintain a bipolar world order, and not allow it to develop into an uncontrollable, unpredictable multipolar world order, is to cripple the countries within the contested zones – in effect, weakening and even destroying emerging tiger economies and emerging markets. The object is not necessarily to bomb them into submission, although the West tried this over the last 30 years. Rather, it is to cripple them through economic sanctions or ‘green’ climate change regulations, preventing their development towards first world nation status. Economically weakening a country allows for the creation of a perpetual state of dependency on aid, resource extraction by foreign powers, leading to continuous political instability and a constant brain drain of its best and brightest who would usually form the vanguard of any future populist movement. This has been the neocolonial formula for managing target nations for much of the post-WWII epoch. 

The three fictional superstates of George Orwell’s dystopian novel 1984 are Oceania, Eurasia, and Eastasia. ‘Disputed territories’ are also indicated. INSET: Map of Mackinder’s “World Island” theory with the central focus being the pivot area of Eurasi

In the context of present-day China, a variation of this Western strategy would aim to takeover or cripple the nations along China’s new Belt and Road Initiative. We’d see a return to Halford Mackinder’s “World Island” theory which saw the strategic imperative of controlling (or disrupting) a unified Eurasian landmass. This might also extend to the BRICS nations bloc (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa), and also the newly codified “Axis of Resistance” comprising the Islamic Republic of Iran, Iraq, Yemen, Syria, Palestine, and Hezbollah in southern Lebanon. While Belt and Road is global and primarily for the benefit of China and stakeholder nations along those trade and transport lines, its emergence serves as unwelcome competition to the predatory Western internationalist model. This could signal a return to Great Game grand strategy, pitting Western sea power against a Chinese-led operational control of the Eurasian landmass – the chief objective being the disruption of resource acquisition by China, and fracturing high-volume Belt and Road travel and commerce routes. In this new bipolar world order, many geopolitical routes and clusters might eventually become part of a “disputed zone,” not unlike the very one depicted in George Orwell’s geopolitical map in the classic dystopian novel 1984. 

Russian political analyst and philosopher Alexander Dugin.Russian political analyst and philosopher Alexander Dugin.

This is not to say that an influential Eurasian geopolitical bloc based on traditional values and norms cannot emerge in the way that Russian political analyst and philosopher Alexander Dugin describes in his numerous treatises, such as The Fourth Political Theory, and Last War of the World-Island: The Geopolitics of Contemporary Russia, to name a few. But if the great powers are intent on preventing the unification of the World Island and forcing the world back into a bipolar paradigm, then it’s likely that Eurasia’s shatter-belt nations, the Middle East and Far East, could once again play a part in a cycle of instability and conflict. 

What better way to retain a firm grip on order at home and along the periphery of the contested zone than to declare perpetual war. For the elites ruling the Western bloc, a new cold (or warm) war also benefits them with raison d’état at home. Or, as Orwell famously said, “Oceania was at war with Eastasia. Oceania had always been at war with Eastasia.”

Over the last 40 years, China has been allowed to develop, but only to a point where it does not threaten the global political and cultural stronghold maintained by the Anglo-American control mesh of Five Eyes intelligence and NATO military alliances. From that viewpoint, economic and political gains are acceptable so long as they are confined to Asian wealth creation and prosperity. But the moment those gains are transformed into economic dependence of Western nations on Asian and Eurasian powers like China and Russia – the geopolitical alarm is tripped and the West’s rapid response mechanism springs into action. Western imperialists know that economic dependence would precede political subservience. 

Their fears may be well-founded, but the reaction can often be counterproductive and negatively impact countries and peoples caught in the middle. Certainly, this was a major source of friction throughout the Cold War (1947–1991), with instability from proxy wars of that period still enduring to the present day. Russia’s Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline project is a prime example. The United States and its allies made it a top priority to disrupt the joint Russian-German energy venture that will bring clean and affordable Russian gas to Europe. A series of regime change operations, proxy wars, false flag events, and all-out propaganda, was waged against Moscow to trigger economic sanctions and ultimately derail the pipeline. The thought of Germany becoming dependent on Russia and developing good bilateral relations is the stuff of horrors for the Anglo-American alliance which relies on constant East-West tension to keep NATO relevant and well-resourced as a military confab and extend its commercial interests through Europe and into the former Soviet states. 

Beyond this, one should be cognizant of the fact that any significant fossil fuel project will be viewed as a direct threat to the global elites’ Great Reset and UN Agenda 2030, and subsequent transition to a New World Order and Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR).

The Great Reset is very much a Western and European-led project. After WWII, traditional colonial powers became post-colonial powers and took on self-appointed custodial duties of planetary management, including ‘climate’ and environmental oversight of what they refer to as the ‘global commons’. By all accounts, this is Brzezinski’s great Technetronic era, only much more green in its rhetoric and governance, designed, we’re told, to save the planet by stopping anthropogenic (man-made) global warming, otherwise known as climate change.

Dangerous Delusions of Malthusianism

This phase of the New World Order, meant to save humanity from the supposed scourge of CO2, conceals a rather disturbing continuance of an older agenda: population management, rooted in 19th century Malthusian theory, and buttressed by a radical offshoot of Darwinism – a social engineering movement known as eugenics.2

Fear of population growth has been with us for a long time, at least since Thomas Malthus’ predictions which later proved wrong as other factors were not taken into account. Fear of population growth has been with us for a long time, at least since Thomas Malthus’ predictions which later proved wrong as other factors were not taken into account.

Thomas Robert Malthus (1766–1834) was an aspiring social engineer who thought the global population would increase geometrically while food production increased arithmetically. What this meant was that humans would be unable to produce enough food to sustain themselves. Fortunately, Malthus was way off on his calculations, but his legacy endures. Historically, wherever you find ‘overpopulation’ discussions, you find eugenicists directing the conversation from the shadows through lavish funding by foundations and civil society organisations, or under the increasingly dubious guise of ‘public health’.

Two leading Malthusian proponents of recent decades are William Gates Sr, father of Bill Gates, and Stanley Johnson, father of current British Prime Minister Boris Johnson. 

As head of the world’s largest private abortion chain organisation, Planned Parenthood, and arguably the driving force behind Bill Gates’ obsession with vaccines, Gates Sr imparted on his son the elite responsibility of planetary management of the masses. Beginning in 2020, Bill Gates Jr has been leading the World Health Organization (WHO), the pharmaceutical industry, and an unprecedented intergovernmental effort, to vaccinate the world’s population with the experimental Covid-19 gene-based jab. When asked about safety concerns, Gates dismissed critics saying that the world did not have time to do proper safety testing and that any collateral damage must be priced-in for the “greater good.” Interestingly, before the pandemic, many of Gates’ media appearances focused on global population management.3 

Stanley Johnson seems to be an even more staunch population reductionist and authored the novel The Virus (1982) about a pandemic threatening to wipe out Europe. He wrote other books obsessing about overpopulation, including the Population Problem (1970), Life Without Birth (1970), and World Population and the United Nations (1987). In one interview, Johnson opined that he would like to reduce the population of Britain substantially, flatly stating, “Britain’s population should be 10-15 million people. That would do us splendidly. It’s a nonsense that we are confronted with 70 million people. But we have been shunted aside by the rise of liberal correctness.”4 To call him a committed Malthusian would be an understatement. It would be useful to know how much of the father’s radical worldview is responsible for son Boris’ enthusiasm for adhering to the UN and World Economic Forum (WEF) Great Reset agenda, adorned with shiny new straplines like “Build Back Better.”

Woke Technocracy of Build Back Better

Invariably, eugenics leads directly to another branch of the elite technocracy movement – transhumanism. During this global pandemic crisis, the ascendancy of Big Tech, Big Pharma and BioTech industries has created an extremely soft-landing pad for transhumanist ideas and the fetishization of an endless array of ‘smart’ technologies, the Internet of Things (IoT), and artificial intelligence (AI) applications. These advances are certainly in development, but adoption is a slow and tedious process. Technocrats are taking advantage of Covid to gain a velocity unattainable outside of a staged crisis like a global pandemic. 

Social engineering, specifically a system of ‘social credit’ scoring, is now ready for implementation in the West. Elite technocrats look enviously at the Chinese social credit system in which citizen behaviour is assigned a score logged on a central database where officials can restrict privileges like air travel, buying property, or taking out a loan.5 This is not unlike Oceania’s citizen scoring system depicted in Orwell’s 1984. The idea may already have gained a foothold in the West through the new ‘Vaccine Passport’ system being aggressively pushed by governments and corporate elites. 

If allowed to proceed, this biopower tracking regime spells an end to previous universally held liberties like the individual right to bodily autonomy and freedom of movement. The imposition of such a system is a hard break from the post-enlightenment era of constitutional republican and democratic governments, giving way to the tyrannical proclivities of an increasingly powerful ruling class, draping itself under the veil of the common good to do the collective will – which can be fashioned through the relentless application of weaponised propaganda and applied behavioural psychology. The collective will or greater good can be whatever the state deems it to be, through the same process of manufacturing consent as outlined in Noam Chomsky and Edward Herman’s seminal text of the same title.6 The weapons of information warfare used to prosecute wars on foreign soil are now fully deployed against the citizens of Western countries. In this way, Orwell’s dystopian fiction is the playbook for what authorities have done in practice from the beginning of the Covid crisis.

Founder and executive chairman of the World Economic Forum, Klaus Schwab.Founder and executive chairman of the World Economic Forum, Klaus Schwab.

In this context, we can view Klaus Schwab’s Build Back Better (BBB) clarion call for a Great Reset as a re-consolidation of the Western Hemisphere and its satellite properties in the developing world – and in direct conflict with China’s Belt and Road. BBB is pure woke technocracy and seeks to put a cap on any development not ‘green’. 

However, BBB goes much deeper than many people realise. At this year’s [2021] G7 Summit in Cornwall, England, British PM Boris Johnson raised a few conservative eyebrows when he declared that BBB would mean, “Build back greener, build back fairer, build back more… gender neutral.”

While this brand of woke identity politicswas known to be present in the WEF material, it was still shocking to hear such progressive post-modernist proselytising coming from a Tory PM. This could also be viewed as an attack on the family itself – the fundamental pillar of any community, state or nation. In this regard, the Western-led drive towards a woke reset is an affront to the nation-state and prelude to an amorphous borderless globalist order. Of course, there will be borders, but perhaps only as exclusion zones – and accessible if a global subject is carrying the correct track and trace digital ID or Vaccine Passport.

What’s important to understand is that this kind of world order was not possible before. Only with new advances in digital technology, data sharing, satellite and surveillance networks, could such an insidious web be implemented.

Embryonic Global Government?

As they often say, a global crisis requires a global response.

The Covid crisis has accelerated the mechanisms required to obliterate the DNA of most sovereign countries through the digital systems used to administrate a new global governance regime. This has been achieved in the following ways – the closure of borders, the normalisation of Covid testing and digital IDs, the demonisation of physical cash and adoption of a cashless society, the final goal being the intentional collapse of the real economy leading to Central Bank-issued digital currency.

Under a future uniform technocracy, there’s no longer any need for democratic forms of government – only symbolic leadership elections of pseudo-populist figureheads who provide the public with stylistic or nuanced differences in appearance (age, gender, colour or ethnicity) and rhetoric, but no substantial deviation from technocratic prescriptions. Should an ‘elected’ leader pursue any genuine populist or traditionalist policies, they would be summarily removed by the real power centre – the high committee of technocrats. 

This system will be formally adopted first in the advanced Western regions and then in the developing world. The EU Parliament is the beta test for such a system, with MEPs elected in their respective member states, sent to Brussels, but they have no actual power to propose new laws. Rather, an unelectedEuropean Commission (EU civil service) ultimately drafts and proposes legislation, which MEPs are allowed to rubber stamp. Despite the undemocratic nature of the EU, there seems little or no protesting from member states. Under this system, change is not a grassroots or bottom-up political effort but a top-down exercise micro-managed by ‘experts’. To date, this is the closest model of embryonic global government, and they’ve had 30 years to fine-tune it before expanding to other global regions. By definition, it is a functioning technocracy.

Green World Order

The Great Reset transition to a Green New Deal and the “financialisation of nature,” paving the way towards automated 4IR, has been exposed in detail by several cutting-edge independent researchers.7 These plans are being hatched at the United Nations and Wall Street level (led by BlackRock), with the new multi-trillion dollar green bond markets, carbon credit trading, and other collateralised green futures and instruments, sold to the public by way of celebrities like Greta Thunberg. 

Government policies like lockdowns have accelerated this new green economy, not on its own merits but by wrecking the existing economy and squeezing out what are now deemed nonessential businesses and services, and anything that falls foul of the post-pandemic New Normal. This constriction will continue, and governments will print up even more money for corporate bailouts and to pay the burgeoning ranks of the unemployed and underemployed not to work. This is a price worth paying for the globalists because the inevitable inflationary cycles that are now set in motion will only negatively affect the lower and middle classes by robbing them of their savings and purchasing power. The elite and mobile globalist class will not feel the negative economic impact, and in fact have seen record gains for those in the favoured digital and ‘essential’ industries. Thanks to generous government ‘stimulus’ money over the last year, the net worth of the billionaire class grew by a quarter to well over $10 trillion and counting.8

As the culling of the real economy continues, that number could easily double by this time next year. These are the new robber barons of the early 21st century, the superclass who will have the liquidity and capital to buy up the remaining assets tied to the old economy and invest in and own the ground level of the new green economy. Like the Rockefellers, Morgans, and Carnegies of the last industrial revolution and oil boom, today’s tech lords are set to dominate this New World Order for at least the next 100 years.

For these global oligarchs, things have never been so good. The New Normal helped solidify their position and wipe out prospective competitors for a generation or more. Schwab and the high priests of technocracy are excited about the destruction brought by lockdowns.

“Many of us are pondering when things will return to normal. The short response is: never. Nothing will ever return to the ‘broken’ sense of normalcy that prevailed prior to the crisis because the coronavirus pandemic marks a fundamental inflection point in our global trajectory,” opined the WEF leader in his Great Reset manifesto.

For many, this is a return of feudalism, but on a new global scale. Schwab admits, “We must prepare for a more angry world.”

The WEF technocrats call for a ‘fair’ Great Reset, run under the new banner of ‘stakeholder capitalism’ and always in the woke spirit of ‘equity’ and utopian-sounding global citizenship. The reality is that the top of this new ‘sustainable’ pyramid will be a hardened corporatist fascist layer dominated by top transnational corporations and government bureaucracies, while the bottom majority will have a collectivist, communitarian system imposed upon them. In the words of the Great Reset proponents, “In the future, you will rent everything” and “you will own nothing and be happy.” That is the future which technocrats are planning for.

Fascism & Conformity

After a year and a half, we are left asking ourselves how such an extreme brand of tyranny has been allowed to promulgate so quickly, and with relative ease. The answer to this question may lie in a study of 20th-century fascism.

The mechanism of control is not necessarily down to flamboyant totalitarian leaders as one might presume. It’s much more subtle and deeper. According to the social psychologist Erich Fromm (1900–1980), the mechanism is found in peoples’ need to exhibit conformity as they harmonise with what he describes as the “authoritarian conscience.”9 The authoritarian conscience in its extreme form, he said, is not about following the commands of a charismatic, authoritarian figure. Morality is determined by conformism. “Virtue is to be adjusted and to be like the rest. Vice, to be different.”

The Covid crisis, with its tightly-wound government and corporate partnership prosecuting the pandemic, has elevated the virtue of conformity with religious zeal. This is now fully internalised by traumatised members of the public.

When a person goes against the group, it no longer brings fear of aloneness but also feelings of guilt. Once internalised, it has a powerful hold on people. According to Fromm: “Conscience is a more effective regulator of conduct than fear of external authorities; for, while one can run away from the latter, one cannot escape from oneself nor, therefore from the internalised authority which has become part of oneself.”10

This explains the power of self-policing behaviour. With individual rights and liberties stripped by the state, the individual is subsumed by the hive. 

Hundred Years War?

When US President George W. Bush famously remarked in 2001, “Our war on terror begins with al Qaeda, but it does not end there,” many thought they’d be digging in for a very long haul. Thus far, the global war on terror has spanned some 20 years.

The stage is now set for a series of new wars.

We are presently engulfed in a new war against another invisible enemy – a biological war against a virus. Or so we’re told. Whether or not SARS-CoV-2 is the bio-threat the government, media and pharma cartels insist that it is, we can be sure that a real war has been waged on our rights and freedoms. We can predict the prospect of a new global war on bio-terror, and an international bioweapons ‘arms race’ which will drive the new cottage bio-terrorism industry.

After the biowar, we can already see the rumblings of a new global cyberwar – complete with endless false flag cyberattacks causing untold chaos and unnecessarily stoking up even more geopolitical tension and animosity between the great powers. Note also that Klaus Schwab cryptically warned the world in 2020 that a cyberwar is coming.

Finally, after the biowar and cyberwar, there remains the final geopolitical spectre, the sum of all fears – thermonuclear war. This could take on a very different tone than the mutually assured destruction (MAD) model that ballasted the US vs USSR Cold War of the 20th century. Today’s world is one of low yield ‘tactical nukes’ which could spark a number of scenarios with unforeseen reactions and outcomes. An asymmetric tactical nuclear war would be more chaotic and likely converge conventional military conflict and continuous cyberwar and bio-threats. Under these circumstances – real or imagined – locking down whole countries and regions as ‘exclusion zones’ could become routine. 

If the Fourth Industrial Revolution comes to fruition and the AI-run machines challenge the pre-eminence of humans on this planet, this conflict could last for one hundred years.

Overcoming the Illusion

These are scenarios based on the foreshadowing that has been broadcast by elites. Some of this, as undesirable as it sounds, could be possible.

In the end, Great Games and grand strategies are about power – who holds it and who wields it well enough to frighten opponents but still achieve strategic objectives.

In many different ways, the architects of this chaos have declared war on humanity.

Whether humanity prevails depends on if we remain human, and that depends on how well we see through the illusion.

We are here now. This is life inside the New World Order.

This article was published in New Dawn 188.

For full references please use source link below.

Read further at Nexus Newsfeed

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.