Over the past several months, a steady drumbeat in elite media circles has been pounding out a persistent theme: global crises have exposed the limits of national sovereignty and underscored the necessity for nations to embrace "global governance."

A theme of climate change, economic meltdown, and terrorism as the new horsemen of the Apocalypse has been shouted and echoed in recent weeks by Henry Kissinger, Bill Clinton, Strobe Talbott of the Brookings Institution, Gary Clyde Hufbauer of the Peterson Institute, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, and President Obama's National Intelligence Director Dennis Blair, to name a few. Of course, the solutions being proffered by the globalist choir for these apocalyptic crises invariably involve "global governance."

Gideon Rachman, a chief foreign affairs columnist for the Financial Times who recently penned an article entitled "And Now for World Government," agrees with the statement of Jacques Attali, an adviser to President Nicolas Sarkozy of France, that "global governance is just a euphemism for global government." Rachman and Attali are both true believers in, and ardent advocates of, world government. They differ from Kissinger, Clinton, Merkel, et al., in being willing to proclaim more openly (if not completely candidly) their one-worldism.

In his worshipful article about the global state, Rachman declares: "So, it seems, everything is in place. For the first time since homo sapiens began to doodle on cave walls, there is an argument, an opportunity and a means to make serious steps towards a world government."

What are the steps that are being proposed toward a world government? There are many, but as pertains to the three horsemen, the principal steps are these: transforming the International Monetary Fund (IMF) into a global Federal Reserve System; concluding a new United Nations climate-change agreement to replace the expiring Kyoto Protocol — with the United States locked in; and creating a 50,000-strong UN army.

The campaign for the first item is well underway with the repeated calls for "supersizing" the IMF. (See "Supersizing" the IMF and The G20 Push to "Supersize" the IMF). The April summit of the Group of Twenty (G20) nations in London has been singled out as the global forum for taking major concrete steps in this direction. Merkel, Brown, Obama and the other national leaders will be joined, for the first time, at the G7-G8-G20 summit level with representatives from the IMF, World Bank, World Trade Organization, and other adjuncts of the United Nations. The G20 summit is almost certain to ratify the IMF's already troubling recent assumption of new global monetary powers, and, going beyond that, to call for a new Bretton Woods Conference to formally restructure the IMF/World Bank system and endow it with vast new powers over the world economy. Prime Minister Gordon Brown openly stated in a speech to the Council on Foreign Relations last November that he envisioned an IMF that "looks more like a global central bank." With a global Federal Reserve System, the United Nations would no longer be beholden to its member nations for dues and contributions. Like our Federal Reserve, it could operate without accountability, transparency, or checks and balances; it could spin out unlimited credit and currency. It would become the economic master of the world — and political master as well.

As if that prospect is not hair-curling enough, the would-be global masters insist that we must also concentrate vast regulatory powers into the hands of global environmental regulators to save ourselves and our planet from the dire peril of catastrophic anthropogenic (human-caused) global warming. The world planners are feeling real urgency on this front, since the phony "scientific consensus" underlying the global-warming specter is melting faster than Homer Simpson's ice cream in Al Gore's mendacious movie An Inconvenient Truth. Though it got relatively little media attention, this month an assembly of scientists convened in New York City to expose the myths, errors, exaggerations, machinations, fraud, and outright lies that are so inextricably intertwined throughout the prevailing global-warming narrative that has been presented by the United Nations and its fawning advocates in the mass media thought cartel.

Everyone, of course, is wary of world-roaming terrorists, and world planners are using the terrorist threat to rationalize a global war on terror that deploys the U.S. military hither and yon to enforce the collective dictates of the "world community." President George W. Bush sent troops to Iraq, recall, to enforce UN Security Council resolutions, despite the fact that Iraq had not attacked us on 9/11. That and other misuses of the U.S. military to serve global interests unrelated to safeguarding our own country harms rather than strengthens our national security.

But whether the rationale is the nonissue of climate change or the real issues of economic meltdown and terrorism, there is no good reason to allow ourselves to be stampeded into world government by the new horsemen of the Apocalypse.

Graphic: Cagle Cartoons

TrackBack URI for this entry

Comments (3)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

R Cozine said:

... They're now saying openly what we "conspiracy kooks" have been saying for decades, and most people still can't see what all the fuss is about. The snake oil salesmen who created the problem in the first place are now going to "solve" the problem by creating a global banking authority and world reserve currency? I don't think so. Nice article, Mr. Jasper.

March 18, 2009

Pathenry said:

EU like Soviet Communism, says Czech President To get a taste of what's cooking, just look at some of the initial, toned-down structures. Here's a good example: “BRUSSELS (AP) – The European Union has turned into an undemocratic and elitist project comparable to the Communist dictatorships of eastern Europe that forbade alternative thinking, Czech President Vaclav Klaus told the European Parliament on Thursday. “Klaus, whose country now holds the rotating EU presidency, set out a scathing attack on the EU project and its institutions, provoking boos from many lawmakers, some of whom walked out, but applause from nationalists and other anti-EU legislators. “Klaus is known for deep skepticism of the EU and has refused to fly the EU flag over his official seat in Prague during the Czech presidency, saying the country is not an EU province. “He said current EU practices smacked of communist times when the Soviet Union controlled much of eastern Europe, including the Czech Republic and when dissent or even discussions were not tolerated. “ ‘Not so long ago, in our part of Europe we lived in a political system that permitted no alternatives and therefore also no parliamentary opposition,’ said Klaus. ‘We learned the bitter lesson that with no opposition, there is no freedom.’ ” Source: Constant Brand, Associated Press, 2/19/09 [as quoted in Howard Phillips' Issues and Strategies Bulletin, #857, March 15, 2009]

March 19, 2009

Dolores Lawless said:

Alarmed citizen What to do?? I feel like a butterfly on a pin.... One important step, I believe, is to bombard Congress to support Congressman Ron Paul's bill: The Federal Reserve Transparency Act of 2009, to audit the Federal Reserve's Board of Governors and the Federal Reserve Banks. The FED was established nearly 100 years ago, is totally unconstitutional since Congress alone was given the power and duty "To coin Money and regulate the Value thereof..." (Article I, Section 8, U.S.Constitution) Article VI states: "The Senators and Representatives...shall be bound by Oath to support this Constitution..." Therefore it seems that EVERY Senator and Rep. who continues to allow this evil, unconstitutional, destructive PRIVATE banking organization to exist is violating his oath and betraying the citizens of the U.S.A Furthermore, nowhere in the Constitution is any authority given to the President or Congress to give taxpayer money to private enterprises. Would we be in the present catastrophic economic position if Congressmen and President were honoring their oath to support the Constitution? May Heaven help us! Perhaps we don't deserve a moral government.

March 20, 2009