09 April 2009

"A New World Order is emerging"

That was the quotation from Gordon Brown this past week. He may not have spoken it with capital letters, and he certainly intended it in a benign sense, but to those versed in conventional "conspiracy theory," it's an ominous choice of words.

Historical use of the phrase dates back to the 1940s (Woodrow Wilson, George Orwell) and is well summarized at the Wiki link.

The conspiracy theory interpretation is, of course, more ominous: "...in conspiracy theory, the term "New World Order" (the capital letters are distinguishing) refers to the advent of a cryptocratic or totalitarian world government."
At the core of most theories, a powerful and secretive group of globalists is conspiring to eventually rule the world through an autonomous world government, which would replace sovereign states and other checks and balances in international power struggles. Significant occurrences in politics and business are speculated to be caused by an extremely influential cabal operating through many front organizations. Numerous historical and current events are seen as steps in an on-going plot to achieve world domination primarily through secret political gatherings and decision-making processes.
Gordon Brown certainly was referring to the former; it's just a bit disconcerting to hear the phrase used.

4 comments:

  1. er...is it just me or did you leave out the best "NWO" speech ever?
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rc7i0wCFf8g

    ReplyDelete
  2. so he is "certainly" meaning it in a benign sense?

    i guess you're also saying that everytime a politician or banker says it they are also "certainly" meaning it this way?

    they are saying it all the time and more and more at the moment and historically have made reference to exactly the things that feature in the standard definition - world government, army, currency, even religion.

    what's certain about that? you think they are all just accidentally using a phrase which as such connotations? you think they just can't think of a better phrase so have to use that one?

    you're a lot more certain that i it seems.

    otherwise, love the blog, but it just seemed a strange thing to be so certain about.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I just think it's amazing that people can look at the collective randomness and bureaucracy of governments an think there is an organized plan there. Seriously, do you think a large group of people are *really* able to keep a big secret? If you understand human nature, you realize the impossibility of this.
    If my goal was totalitarian reign, you can be certain I won't want to wait 50-60 years or more, when I'm in my 80's and 90's to see it happen. I would want to enjoy the fruits of it, not leave it as a legacy for someone else to complete.
    I'd rather fight the enemy I can see than the bogeyman I imagine.

    ReplyDelete
  4. i don't claim to understand human nature. i think there is a lot we don't understand at all.

    also, i'm not claiming exactly what you've said, all i'm saying is that i personally wouldn't claim that people using the term 'new world order' is "certainly benign".

    history suggests otherwise.

    ReplyDelete