I strongly suggest kicking that habit. Or are you a part of the US government (i.e. do you work for it in some capacity)?
Well, I haven’t entirely committed to anarchy, but my opinion (now unqualified) may change once I read him.
Indeed - that’s why I brought it up.
I’m fifteen. >.>
I maintain my suggestion.
Thank you.
Now, does anyone have any comments on my post?
One of my biggest problems with the whole notion that a government represents a people, is that when I go overseas I am subject to ridicule simply for being an American. This is, in part, due to stereotypes (about us being fat, stupid, etc.) but mostly because of the way the United States government treats other nations. I certainly don’t blame these people for being angry, but I just hate it when they take out that frustration on people who have nothing to do with the government and just want to travel abroad.
No one? Maybe I’m so smart no one can argue with me. That must be it.
@Luminar: I work full-time, so I don’t have enough hours in the day to refute every teenager on the Internet. Aristippus has already burst my bubble with the Germany remark… (Aristippus, some details would be welcome…) My post was mostly an attempt at “mental war-gaming”, trying to work out a possible “hidden plan”.
I do believe the New World Order is real (though it isn’t want most people think it is, even most people who are involved in it), and I do think that 9/11 marks the beginning of a “third attempt” to bring about world government (the fist two being WWI and WWII). The difference this time is that they’ve spread it out over time. Instead of trying to do it through a four-year burst of orgiastic, globe-spanning war and slaughter, they’re trying to keep the general level of social anxiety high through less-lethal means (widespread yet sporadic terrorist incidents) while pressing the case for world government.
It’s difficult to foresee exactly what they have in mind but there are some basic facts I’m fairly convinced of. 1) They have no problems laying waste to entire populations and destroying vast sums of wealth. 2) They try to keep society divided along binary lines to the greatest extent possible. Male versus female, rich vs. poor, east vs. west, etc. 3) They keep the divided segments of society in competition for “goodies”, that is, promotions, rewards, benefits, privileges, power, etc. All goodies come from above (top of the pyramid down). 4) Whenever a particular segment of society presents an existential threat to the whole system (e.g. by promoting liberal philosophy), it is targeted for annihilation. Look at what happened to Austria in the 20th century. I believe the Americans presented a similar sort of existential threat to the system in the latter half of the 20th century. We are slated for either subjugation or annihilation. This is the ultimate reason for the 2008 housing collapse - it was the first move in a financial takeover operation and we are now being held hostage indefinitely until we comply with the agenda (starting with disarmament).
</paranoid conspiracy ranting>
Clayton -
To quote Alex Jones, it is planned and engineered by design.*
*As opposed to it being planned and engineered not by design.
These are the kind of things that need some kind of citation. Disarmament? You mean our handguns et al or the U.S. government’s white phosphorus and nuclear bombs?
I think restructure the middle east in favor of Western oil and Israeli security is closer to the ‘why’ of 9/11. They aren’t going to start building world government with armies in third world nations…World government will be through a bureaucratization of international regulations; WTO, WHO, FAO, WB, IMF, IPCC, etc. Once those types of institutions are formalized in national state agendas, there will be a de facto world government. This is a ways off, as they first need to regionalize the world (Brzezinski). Scholars call it “Multi-lateral institutionalization” and “multi-lateral world order” if you want to hit up the academic perspective in your conspiricizing. The plan is not a secret.
In 2008 collapse, you wanted to be in cash, specifically the US dollar, and you will want to be in cash again in the next collapse, but this time in PMs because a precious metals (PM) money system will be implemented. Why would they do so if such a system would be a restraint on states? Because TPTB would own a huge part, if not most, of the PMs and mines in the world. Meanwhile, paper money would collapse value and its major holders would be the masses.
O.O
I think I understand why you don’t understand geopolitics now… you’re not the first conspiracy theorist I’ve run across.
Respond to what?
One cannot be a member of both categories?
Please, fill me in. If you have access to what goes on behind closed doors in the halls of power, I’m all ears. If by “understand geopolitics”, you mean “read Foreign Affairs”, you’re right, I don’t and I don’t care to.
Clayton -
Two things,
One, don’t write off the words of the ones you wish to know.
Two, the FA journal isn’t the New York Times. It is meant to inform the planners not pacify/sate the layman. It is also varied in opinions (even ant-iestablishment views). There is more truth in the academic/think tank world than the news and the pundits…
The U.S. has helped to cultivate this. Energy Indpependence would set China up for an easy world takeover, but the U.S. has worked hard to make sure that it is dependent on others for oil. China has tried to make inrodes in Indonesia and the Phillipines (and many others in the past) and the U.S. has put a stop to both of them. We wanted their production dependent on the petrodollar system which has just ended in the last two or three years. I think the goal has been to turn China into a direct competitor with Russia, the ultimate goal being to turn them against each other.
Russia and China just made a deal two weeks ago that Russia will sell China as much energy as they need in their own currencies. Presumably this was a response to the Syria/Iran situation scaring China.
I’m not sure what China is going to do with all of the money they have been saving. They cannot be as stupid as the U.S. (petrodollar and counterfeiting are such flimsy foundations for world empire). If they are to survive and be a world power they have to get ambitious. I’m not sure how Russia wil react to a glowing hot China.
But, all in all Russia and Germany are going to be the two major world powers after any kind of serious war scenario.
FA is the CFR’s newsletter. NYT et. al. are the CFR’s propaganda outlets. Six of one, half-dozen of the other…
Clayton -
No. First, the FA is a quarterly bimonthly journal published by the CFR. It is not a newsletter, either. It is an academic consultant journal…
Like I said, the FA journal is NOT FOR THE IDIOT in the street (you). It is for the planners themselves (not you). That is one reason why you cannot buy it at CVS. The NYT IS FOR THE IDIOT in the street (again, you).
One is propaganda. The other…actually is not (although it is used as such by the other; the NYT will report policy papers as research papers and that is how they propagandize). Be a naive Alex Jonesian if you want, but know that you will look like a fool in front of people who actually read.
The only think tank-propaganda outlet I have been able to verify is that the Daily Beast is a propaganda spout for the Brookings Institute.
I take exception to the offensive tone of your post. Most of the people in this thread could be idiots on the street, but Clayton isnt one of them. Youre also not contradicting him here, he didnt say it was propaganda. He said it was their newsletter. You should probably do more actual reading yourself, because discussing geopolitics with someone who actually has a clue (Clayton) doesnt seem to be doing you any good.
We are all idiots in the street, dude. The categories that I set up were (the planners) and (idiots in the street). Everyone is one or the other…
I’m sorry, but he’s been ripped apart in this thread. And shown to have a very shallow understanding of the things involved…
Do you know what “Six of one, half-dozen of the other…” means, Malachi?
Which is wrong…
Says someone who has contributed nothing to this conversation…have you read and absorbed the three opinions that have been given in this thread?