New World Order?

[me-wonders]

This is astonishing to me. We use the term "New World Order" as though we in the US invented that idea. It is not our idea. It is a Prussian idea, developed before the first world war, and is what Eisenhower called the Military/Industrial Complex. It is what Hitler was about, and when the US adopted the German bureaucratic model that shifted power from the individual to the state, and replaced its liberal education with the German model of education for technology and military and industrial purpose, and replaced classical philosophy with German philosophy, it put itself on the same path Germany followed. Calling this a conspiracy is non sense. It is what the Prussians did when they took charge of the whole of Germany. They applied Prussian military bureaucracy to citizens, and focused education on technology for the rapid development of military technology. Industry is used to support the military and the military is used to defend a nation's economic interest. No one would call that a conspiracy. It is a logical and well thoughtout plan involving every aspect our lives, including and the end to family order. Which brings me to- What was the old world order?

There were good reasons for change, but our lack of awareness of what happened, and why, and how, has thrown everything out of our control, so this is an exercise in gaining awareness, and hopefully, our ability to take back control.

[Damrod]

The "old world way" to globalization was conquest and submission....the "new" way is through bribery in the form of foreign aid and promise of wealth and power through a centralized world governing organization...at least I think that's what the conspiracy theorists say...

Don't care myself...they all stink...

[me-wonders]

The answer I was expecting is family order. We have gotten far away from family order. Although people still marry and are held responsible for their children, the family does not have the power it once had, because government power over the people has become so much greater. This is such a huge change, I am finding it hard to articulate it without other people's thoughts to bounce off of.

I have an old family law book that makes family legally responsible for family. Today, if older woman lives in any kind of government housing, she can not take in a son or daughter or grandchildren, without government permission and this is unlikely to be given. The Senior Companion Program was designed to take advantage of low income older women who had spent their lives caring for family. For a far less than minimum wage they visit with other older people, and take them shopping and to doctor visits. The training video showed people being helped by Senior Companions, talking about how is it just like having family. This has totally flipped, with new Senior Companions being trained to be impersonal, and fired if they are too friendly. My first exposure to this move to impersonalness was a teacher's 1960 text book explaining the importance of being impersonal.

[SlimJim22]

The "old world way" to globalization was conquest and submission....the "new" way is through bribery in the form of foreign aid and promise of wealth and power through a centralized world governing organization...at least I think that's what the conspiracy theorists say...

Ain't that the truth?

The NWO was originally linked with Bacon's New Atlantis and represented the desire to have a new world that was free from the shackles on Monarchy in favour of a Republic capable of faster progress. It was based on a Hermetic philosophy linked to the Knights Templar and has existed since then in various forms aimed to assist mankind.

However, at regular junctures the elite or OWO have infiltrated the instituions designed to bring about development and they have monopolized them to give the elite even greater control over the masses.

The military complex idea has some merit but it has really existed for a very long time and the OWO or elite has always attempted to have the strongest arms available to them.

[Soul Kitchen]

A New World Order can be anything. I doubt that the "elite" are taking over the world, though.

[Leah G.]

A New World Order can be anything. I doubt that the "elite" are taking over the world, though.

I don't know about that! I hope your right but people are being too controlled now. Family values are turning in to government regulation.

[Trog]

I have no problem with a one world government , which I understand the NWO to mean , the idea behind it was to prevent war , countries go to war because of what their government decides , if we only have one government there can be no conflict , it sounds good in theory .

[me-wonders]

I see there are different ways to understand the New World Order. So far none of the responses come close to what I said about the US adopting adopting German philosophy, and using the Prussian bureaucracy to order the life of citizens, and using education to program the young to fit into this mechanical society, and this is completely different from a society organized by family order. The shift from individual power and liberty to government control over our lives has been totally missed.

Is anyone familiar with Tocqueville's "Democracy in America" published in English in 1835."Above this race of men stands as immense and tutelary power, which takes upon itself alone to secure their gratifications, and to watch over their fate. That power is absolute, minute, regular, provident, and mild. It would be like the authority of a parent, if, like that authority , its object was to prepare men for manhood, but it seeks, on the contrary, to keep them in perpetual childhood; it is well content that the people should rejoice, provided they think of nothing but rejoicing."

[SlimJim22]

What exactly is this German philosophy you speak of?

The familial relationship diminishing in contrast to the state and global instituions could come into the debate of the NWO but it is a debate where the waters have been irrevecobally muddied.

I do really like your quote though. This is as true today that it was in 1835 if not more so and to me this is demonstrative of behavioural patterns of what I consider the Old World Order of ruling elites. They are threatened when the 'everyman' becomes educated and liberated so they are careful to restrict opportunities as much as possible to family or business relationships. We are moving into a world where corporations are the new family and they could potentially be dangerous in allowing the OWO to extend their influence unless there is a moderating force to counter it. I guess that countering force would be the leaders of the real NWO.

[lightly]

I have no problem with a one world government , which I understand the NWO to mean , the idea behind it was to prevent war , countries go to war because of what their government decides , if we only have one government there can be no conflict , it sounds good in theory .

The United States of America had "one government" when some states decided to secede from the union and the civil war broke out . Centralization of power is no Insurance against war. People are capable of killing each other over a soccer match.

*

Edited June 4, 2011 by lightly

[Soul Kitchen]

The United States of America had "one government" when some states decided to secede from the union and the civil war broke out . Centralization of power is no Insurance against war. People are capable of killing each other over a soccer match.

*

It would lessen conflict, but there would most certainly still be conflict.

One world government wouldn't mean one world society or culture.

[SlimJim22]

It would lessen conflict, but there would most certainly still be conflict.

One world government wouldn't mean one world society or culture.

The way the UN was originally was conceived was quqite a good idea i.e. you have a centralized global body that is responsible for maintaining peace. If this system actually worked then it would be ok because war would be discouraged and parties would be forced to compromise.

However, if you want a totalitarian super state with centralized army to crush rebels and insurgents then yes war will always exist. The NWO by its nature could or should not get involved in any kind of conflict. Look at the situation Neo-Liberalism has caused in Arab states now. It may turn out well in the long run but the UN should be more active in finding a peaceful resoultion when this never seems to have been considered. An aggressive NWO cannot work, it cannot be imposed on people unless they agree with the philosophy behind it.

The UN was begun by the Lucis Trust, a Theosophical initiative and unfortuanetly this wisdom tradition was somewhat confused because the research was not supported by science. Now we have all of the data we need to make an informed decision about what the NWO will be. That is if we take an active part in its creation and are not paralyzed by fear waiting for others to make the tough decisions.

[me-wonders]

What exactly is this German philosophy you speak of?

The familial relationship diminishing in contrast to the state and global instituions could come into the debate of the NWO but it is a debate where the waters have been irrevecobally muddied.

I do really like your quote though. This is as true today that it was in 1835 if not more so and to me this is demonstrative of behavioural patterns of what I consider the Old World Order of ruling elites. They are threatened when the 'everyman' becomes educated and liberated so they are careful to restrict opportunities as much as possible to family or business relationships. We are moving into a world where corporations are the new family and they could potentially be dangerous in allowing the OWO to extend their influence unless there is a moderating force to counter it. I guess that countering force would be the leaders of the real NWO.

I could be wrong, but I think people are more familiar with Nietzsche and Hegel than with Aristotle and Plato, and I don't think anyone reads Cicero today. Aristotle, Plato and Cicero were essential reading to Thomas Jefferson and his peers, and are behind the Statue of Liberty carrying a book for literacy and a torch of enlightenment.

You are addressing what I am talking when you say "where corporations are the new family and they could potentially be dangerous..." But this is not exactly the biggest threat. I will try another quote,

In the Past, personal and political liberty depended to a considerable extent upon government inefficiency. The spirit of tyranny was always more than willing; but its organization and material equipment were generally weak. Progressive science and technology have changed all this completely. Aldous Huxley

Aldous Huxley wrote "Brave New World" a book that I wish were mandatory reading in high school, and with Wells, "1984". This generation of men, wrote together and shared concerns about the power of a police state. I believe John Dewey is in there with them. You can register my concern as a generational thing. Their books would have been popular when my father was in his prime, and this is the generation that fought WWII and is dying. They influenced those of my generation, but not many of us paid attention.

I became alarmed while researching the history of education. Here is how a speaker at the 1917 National Education Association Conference describe our world war I enemy, she is quote a poet and seer of India, Tagore.

"Whatever their efficiency, such great organizations are so impersonal that they bear down on the individual lives of the people like a hydraulic press whose action is completely impersonal and therefore completely effective in crushing out individual liberty and power."

I studied the history of education, by buying old text books for children and teachers, and books about the history of education, written when history was being made. Also, because we are imitating Germany in every significant way, and Germany is known for its completely intolerable treatment of Jews, I collect books about Germany written when history was made. People are unprepared to discuss the shift of power, from the individual to the state, resulting from imitating Germany. Especially, they are unprepared to discuss the power shift directly resulting from applying Prussian military bureaucracy to citizens. I don't know how to present this extremely important subject. It is too boring, although nothing could have changed our lives more radically, short of Germany winning the world war.

Edited June 6, 2011 by me-wonders

[me-wonders]

The old world order was ordered by family order. This order was supported by theocracy which tells us God wills some people to rule and others to serve. This of course supported monarchies. Things were as they were because that is the way God willed them to be.

Hellenism (democracy) disrupted this order, because it did not respect privilege or position by birth. It was working with the idea that are equal under the law. This equality does not mean the same. We are as different as the Gods, and it is unfortunate some think equality means the same. This is the failure to educate our young in democracy. Anyway, under Hellenism, anyone with the right qualities could be a ruler or hold positions of authority, rather than be born into such positions. However, Hellenism retained family values, and they remained ordered by family order, just not locked into that order.

It was the military that spread a more technologically based order. I am leaving this open, because all countries have known military order, but their military order did not evolve the same in all places. So I will just jump to the Prussian military order, which was later applied to citizens and adopted by the US. The US has so completely destroyed tradition values and family order, that we can clearly see, what is left as different from a society ordered by family order. The bureaucratic implications, and the shift of power from the individual to the state, is huge. I don't think we want to continue in this direction, but as long as we remain unaware of the change, we have no control over it.

[SlimJim22]

Yes Germany has had some of the most renowned philosopheres; Goethe and Steiner on top of those you mentioned as well as many more. Isn't it quite strange how Germany descended into Socialism with all of these great wisdom behind them?

I'd be keen to here more of the Prussian military orders. It does not sound in the slightest bit boring but my knowledge of that area is severly lacking. I know they spoke French were extremely powerful in Central and Eastern Europe at a time and were very big into dynasties and pomp and ceremony, like most monarchists.

A New Order should impose equality of opportunity, 100% inheritance tax would be one way to set ablout achieving this but this will still allow room for corporations to continue a practice of 'Cronyism' the way the OWO has managed to sustain itself and it's dominance for generations.

A new system of Meritocracy and Equitism strikes me as the next logical step but media induced paranoia induces apathy. Failure to act can be fatal if it becomes systemic.

Huxley was a legend.

Huxley identified four "fundamental doctrines" of the perennial philosophy:

"First: the phenomenal world of matter and of individualized consciousness—the world of things and animals and men and even gods—is the manifestation of a Divine Ground within which all partial realities have their being, and apart from which they would be non-existent.

"Second: human beings are capable not merely of knowing about the Divine Ground by inference; they can also realize its existence by a direct intuition, superior to discursive reasoning. This immediate knowledge unites the knower with that which is known.

"Third: man possesses a double nature, a phenomenal ego and an eternal Self, which is the inner man, the spirit, the spark of divinity within the soul. It is possible for a man, if he so desires, to identify himself with the spirit and therefore with the Divine Ground, which is of the same or like nature with the spirit.

"Fourth: man's life on earth has only one end and purpose: to identify himself with his eternal Self and so to come to intuitive knowledge of the Divine Ground."

[me-wonders]

Yes Germany has had some of the most renowned philosopheres; Goethe and Steiner on top of those you mentioned as well as many more. Isn't it quite strange how Germany descended into Socialism with all of these great wisdom behind them?

I'd be keen to here more of the Prussian military orders. It does not sound in the slightest bit boring but my knowledge of that area is severly lacking. I know they spoke French were extremely powerful in Central and Eastern Europe at a time and were very big into dynasties and pomp and ceremony, like most monarchists.

A New Order should impose equality of opportunity, 100% inheritance tax would be one way to set ablout achieving this but this will still allow room for corporations to continue a practice of 'Cronyism' the way the OWO has managed to sustain itself and it's dominance for generations.

A new system of Meritocracy and Equitism strikes me as the next logical step but media induced paranoia induces apathy. Failure to act can be fatal if it becomes systemic.

Huxley was a legend.

Huxley identified four "fundamental doctrines" of the perennial philosophy:

"First: the phenomenal world of matter and of individualized consciousness—the world of things and animals and men and even gods—is the manifestation of a Divine Ground within which all partial realities have their being, and apart from which they would be non-existent.

"Second: human beings are capable not merely of knowing about the Divine Ground by inference; they can also realize its existence by a direct intuition, superior to discursive reasoning. This immediate knowledge unites the knower with that which is known.

"Third: man possesses a double nature, a phenomenal ego and an eternal Self, which is the inner man, the spirit, the spark of divinity within the soul. It is possible for a man, if he so desires, to identify himself with the spirit and therefore with the Divine Ground, which is of the same or like nature with the spirit.

"Fourth: man's life on earth has only one end and purpose: to identify himself with his eternal Self and so to come to intuitive knowledge of the Divine Ground."

I was unaware of Huxley's four "fundamental doctrines". That is a very interesting explanation. I think I will have to look into it more.

I think the Prussian military you mentioned is the old order. Charles Sarolea quotes Dr. Friedrich Naumann in his book "The Anglo-German Problem" published in 1915, but written before the first world war. He was warning of how the Prussians had changed Germany and were mobilizing for war. No one paid attention to Charles Sarolea until the first world war began. Here is quote.

The war of the future is a problem of economic organization of the most difficult nature and the highest technical achievement, such as has never been hitherto demanded for any army. The old military qualities must give way to the organizing qualities. No doubt the courage and endurance of the individual soldier must remain for all times the foundation of military power, but organizing genius is required in order not to waste that courage and endurance. This is clearly shown from a mere examination of the colossal numbers engaged. To transport, to locate, and to feed these masses of men is the daily preoccupation of the military authorities. That they rightly understand the nature of the problem is certain, but it is very doubtful whether the problem can ever be adequately solved by commanders who are recruited from the Junhertum. Mere military capacity does not suffice here. Both enemies and friends admit that our corps of officers possess such military capacity. Anxiety only arises with regard to their other qualifications. We know that our nation possess in its industries successful organizers, brains accustomed to direct great quantities of material and "personnel"- men who create new conditions of life for whole economic districts without having to appeal to any mystical authority. As democratic politicians we may often have to oppose bitterly those captains of industry, but it if comes to war we shall be willing to be led by them, because we know that they have the brains. It is true that they must not meddle with the technical duties of the officers, but the administration of the war material must be their province. and even with regard to the technique of war, it becomes from year to year more questionable whether this can be managed more efficiently by a corps of noblemen than by the representatives of middle-class technique. However much we may value the moral qualities of the old ruling class-and, with all political differences of opinion, we shall not minimize those qualities- we must admit that we are witnessing a transformation of methods of attack and defense which in addition to the old question of iron discipline raises the modern question; how far shall we be able on the battle field to replace the human unit through machinery?......

The quote goes on and I am willing to provide more of it, but this post is getting very long. The advent of the machine run on fuel and electrical power, radically changed our consciousness. At first these machines served us, but as this consciousness evolved, we have some to serve the machine. The biggest objection to Germany was that it had become a mechanical society. The technology we are talking about here is not just the technology of machines and weapons, but also bureaucratic technology. Despite what Dr. Friedrich Naumann said of preserving what was good of the old order, it was totally replaced by a bureaucratic technology that is completely impersonal and therefore, complete crushes individual liberty and power. I will provide more detail if it is wanted. But to cut to the quick, every job is narrowly defined, and the people doing the jobs are disposable. Whoever, does a job, will do it by the book and exactly the same as the person before. Everyone will function a piece of the machine, as specialized for the position as a part fits a machine. One will not know the other, so none have power. Only from the top will all the functions be known and understood, and nothing can be changed, unless those at the top determine change is necessary. If you are just a clerk or a citizen, good luck finding out what the policy is and who can change it. Short of mobilizing enough strong public interest to get the attention of those elected to office, nothing is going to be consciously changed. Our democracy has been perverted, and while we may enjoy the freedom to pierce our bodies and dye our hair pink, this is not the liberty for which the US stood, when it engaged in two world wars.

This radically changes our lives. For example, I use a CPAP machine for breathing at night, and can not get supplies that I need often, without being assigned a supplier, who must process the paper work, (about 2 weeks) before I can have an appointment, and possibly get my supplies. I can't even find out if a supplier sells the product I want without going through the processing, because they do not deal with the public. I can not go from one supplier to another, without formally discontinuing with the one and being processed by the next one. This is a nightmare of lost personal power, and the only thing anyone knows about this is the good reasons for doing things this way. Our consciousness has been radically changed.

By the way, you know Cheney and Halburton?

Edited June 12, 2011 by me-wonders

[Soul Kitchen]

However, if you want a totalitarian super state with centralized army to crush rebels and insurgents then yes war will always exist.

Crushing an entire world full of rebels and insurgents is easier said than done.

The Americans would flip out, and they're well armed.

[SlimJim22]

I was unaware of Huxley's four "fundamental doctrines". That is a very interesting explanation. I think I will have to look into it more.

I think the Prussian military you mentioned is the old order. Charles Sarolea quotes Dr. Friedrich Naumann in his book "The Anglo-German Problem" published in 1915, but written before the first world war. He was warning of how the Prussians had changed Germany and were mobilizing for war. No one paid attention to Charles Sarolea until the first world war began. Here is quote.

The quote goes on and I am willing to provide more of it, but this post is getting very long. The advent of the machine run on fuel and electrical power, radically changed our consciousness. At first these machines served us, but as this consciousness evolved, we have some to serve the machine. The biggest objection to Germany was that it had become a mechanical society. The technology we are talking about here is not just the technology of machines and weapons, but also bureaucratic technology. Despite what Dr. Friedrich Naumann said of preserving what was good of the old order, it was totally replaced by a bureaucratic technology that is completely impersonal and therefore, complete crushes individual liberty and power. I will provide more detail if it is wanted. But to cut to the quick, every job is narrowly defined, and the people doing the jobs are disposable. Whoever, does a job, will do it by the book and exactly the same as the person before. Everyone will function a piece of the machine, as specialized for the position as a part fits a machine. One will not know the other, so none have power. Only from the top will all the functions be known and understood, and nothing can be changed, unless those at the top determine change is necessary. If you are just a clerk or a citizen, good luck finding out what the policy is and who can change it. Short of mobilizing enough strong public interest to get the attention of those elected to office, nothing is going to be consciously changed. Our democracy has been perverted, and while we may enjoy the freedom to pierce our bodies and dye our hair pink, this is not the liberty for which the US stood, when it engaged in two world wars.

This radically changes our lives. For example, I use a CPAP machine for breathing at night, and can not get supplies that I need often, without being assigned a supplier, who must process the paper work, (about 2 weeks) before I can have an appointment, and possibly get my supplies. I can't even find out if a supplier sells the product I want without going through the processing, because they do not deal with the public. I can not go from one supplier to another, without formally discontinuing with the one and being processed by the next one. This is a nightmare of lost personal power, and the only thing anyone knows about this is the good reasons for doing things this way. Our consciousness has been radically changed.

By the way, you know Cheney and Halburton?

See I think the NWO will have to occur from the bottom up. Beginning with grassroots education and enterprise people will awaken to the choice of being a slave or being some kind of creator or at least a cog in an innovative system of operation. Collectives and clusters could gradually compete with big businesses and size may become a handicap, I infact think corporations size should be limited anyway but from where we are it is the people as consumers and labour who give all the power to the OWO, the bankers and the military as well as other industries but they are all owned or at least controlled by approximately 6,000 individuals alone. We are over 6 billion in opposition so if people stopped joining armies or if banks no longer ran and nobody voted then they have to impose a police state or implement Meritocracy.

You only have to look at pop music and the explicit messages of police states to see that they are covering this angle incase they need to recruit a whole generation of soldiers or civil agents willing to kill or maim on the cause of sustaining order. In BNW it is soma that sedates the population and for society now it is celebrity and beauty and the novelty of technology. It will be hard to break the hold when the OWO has big names like Beyonce touting the agenda but in the long run I feel people will see through the deception to what really is.

The point of confusion is the Divine Feminine or rising feminine energy in humanity that comes to the surface at irregular intervals to revitalize culture and taking it in new directions and to higher levels through a dialectic approach. However, the way the Goddess or ascending feminine is portrayed in popular culture is actually more masculine and dominant. This is false and undoes the metaphor as set by the archetypes. Have you seen/read Metropolis?

[Old Hippie Blogger]

I have no problem with a one world government , which I understand the NWO to mean , the idea behind it was to prevent war , countries go to war because of what their government decides , if we only have one government there can be no conflict , it sounds good in theory .

Really? How many wars are historically related to religion? How many wars were for resources desired by the industrialists? No, there is more than one reason that people go to war, and a single world government is not the answer to ending war. The answer lays in us, the people changing our attitudes. And I can't agree that one govt. would NOT have to deal with conflict. Civil wars, uprisings and coups have always existed.

[me-wonders]

See I think the NWO will have to occur from the bottom up. Beginning with grassroots education and enterprise people will awaken to the choice of being a slave or being some kind of creator or at least a cog in an innovative system of operation. Collectives and clusters could gradually compete with big businesses and size may become a handicap, I infact think corporations size should be limited anyway but from where we are it is the people as consumers and labour who give all the power to the OWO, the bankers and the military as well as other industries but they are all owned or at least controlled by approximately 6,000 individuals alone. We are over 6 billion in opposition so if people stopped joining armies or if banks no longer ran and nobody voted then they have to impose a police state or implement Meritocracy.

You only have to look at pop music and the explicit messages of police states to see that they are covering this angle incase they need to recruit a whole generation of soldiers or civil agents willing to kill or maim on the cause of sustaining order. In BNW it is soma that sedates the population and for society now it is celebrity and beauty and the novelty of technology. It will be hard to break the hold when the OWO has big names like Beyonce touting the agenda but in the long run I feel people will see through the deception to what really is.

The point of confusion is the Divine Feminine or rising feminine energy in humanity that comes to the surface at irregular intervals to revitalize culture and taking it in new directions and to higher levels through a dialectic approach. However, the way the Goddess or ascending feminine is portrayed in popular culture is actually more masculine and dominant. This is false and undoes the metaphor as set by the archetypes. Have you seen/read Metropolis?

Hum, I think I would enjoy meeting with you and discussing your thoughts about the feminine energy. Have you noticed how some of the recent rebellions were triggered by women? There is also talk of women speaking to Taliban about ending the violence. I think in general, women fundamentally think differently from men. I am unclear about feminine power in the US. For sure it became taboo to be feminine and we crushed the feminine aspect as did Germany when the Prussians militarized Germany.

As for the education, I think liberal education is essential to our liberty. We replaced our liberal education with the German model of education for technology for military and industrial purpose, just years before "women's liberation" and the taboo against being feminine. Women had to be as men, and the pressure to be as men is still very strong! This most certainly did come with developing the military, industrial complex. I think it goes together. That is why I write. I want to raise awareness of what we did to education and of the importance of liberal education in defending our democracy with liberty. Germany was also a democracy, but it was a very authoritarian democracy, supported by Christian concepts of God's will and the need to obey authority.

[SlimJim22]

Really? How many wars are historically related to religion? How many wars were for resources desired by the industrialists? No, there is more than one reason that people go to war, and a single world government is not the answer to ending war. The answer lays in us, the people changing our attitudes. And I can't agree that one govt. would NOT have to deal with conflict. Civil wars, uprisings and coups have always existed.

I agree a One World Government is not necessarily the answer as it stands. One, it may be construed or actually manifest as Totalitarianism and this will not do us any good. Two, we still have the problems of politicians and corruption. Therefore we must look at alternatives and the one that stands out is Meritocracy whereby politicians are effectively eliminated and people are elected to positions of leadership based upon their abilities and experience and their personality. In theory this should move us away from a soceity that is more prepared to cover up its failings to one that is willing to learn from them.

IMO the NWO should be decentralized as much as possible so rather than all nations following the same design tey should be encouraged to experiment to see what works best for them but above all to cooperate and collaborate with one another.

Changing the attitudes is the hard part though some of this is well under way. The Venus Project and the Resource Based Economy is one example but there is a need for a new kind of justice, education and psychological health care. This is a huge challenge but one worth overcoming.

I agree Me-Wonders, the change to a mechanized and militarized complex has had some detrimental effects on society. Largely this could be termed masculine energy because it is logical, linear, progressive and dimineering. The central issue though is exploitation and education falls into this. So some of the biggest employers world wide currently are the military, scientific and engineering including pharamacy and computer technicians and finally the media. Thus we get children being educated or funneled into higher education to meet demand for labour in these areas. Children and individuals should be allowed to decide what subjects they wish to learn and the teachers should be there to facilitate this combined with critical thinking, essaay writing and oral communication.

The ultimate aim being, to create rounded individuals who can operate and contribute to society through diversity. This would create healthy individuals and communities. The alternative is to have increasing levels of specialization and this can be anti-social and causing undue strees to individuals and also there is a failing in the transmission of skills and knowledge between one and another.

The Evolution is underway but needs as many people as possible to take an active role in the creation of the New Order in order to prevent the rulers of the Old system do not hijack the new and put it out of our reach.

[War Eagle]

This is astonishing to me. We use the term "New World Order" as though we in the US invented that idea. It is not our idea. It is a Prussian idea, developed before the first world war, and is what Eisenhower called the Military/Industrial Complex. It is what Hitler was about, and when the US adopted the German bureaucratic model that shifted power from the individual to the state, and replaced its liberal education with the German model of education for technology and military and industrial purpose, and replaced classical philosophy with German philosophy, it put itself on the same path Germany followed. Calling this a conspiracy is non sense. It is what the Prussians did when they took charge of the whole of Germany. They applied Prussian military bureaucracy to citizens, and focused education on technology for the rapid development of military technology. Industry is used to support the military and the military is used to defend a nation's economic interest. No one would call that a conspiracy. It is a logical and well thoughtout plan involving every aspect our lives, including and the end to family order. Which brings me to- What was the old world order?

There were good reasons for change, but our lack of awareness of what happened, and why, and how, has thrown everything out of our control, so this is an exercise in gaining awareness, and hopefully, our ability to take back control.

Also astonishing how i think it may have been sub promoted globally into the minds of Generation Z (1995-2012) thru Pro Wrestling...

NWO

Edited June 20, 2011 by REBEL

[SlimJim22]

Also astonishing how i think it may have been sub promoted globally into the minds of Generation Z (1995-2012) thru Pro Wrestling...

NWO

I once thouroughly enjoyed the acrobatics and costume drama that was pro wrestling and then it was plagued by propaganda. As I recall I was approx 15 watching WCW on a friday night when limos would start pulling up and people would get out and beat the s**t into middle aged commentators and whoever got in the way. I know it was still an act and an upping of the drama but with hindsight this is where the demonization of the NWO in young minds began.

Eric Bishchoff was the instigator backed up by Ted Dibiase (RIP) and Hollywood Hogan. It was the beginning of the end for wrestling as nonpartizan entertainment and from then on it became about something more that the wrestling or personalities. It became about the money and the ego and the worst thing was that they recruited legends who'd fallen on hard times to play this part although few people at the time probably had any idea what the NWO was all about.

I'm not sure what books would have been around in 1997 that outed the Illuminati and NWO but it is now my opinion that this was some kind of subtle propaganda designed to fan the flames of fear and make people paranoid of Illuminist ideologies and instead of identifying them with sustainability or knowledge, when NWO is mentioned to any men of a certain age the first image they will get is not that of A Brave New World but a load of wrestlers in trunks and black vests with NwO written on them. What on earth is it all about? Maybe it is nothing but maybe it is some perverse way of creating apathy and confusion by making the terms of conflict seem totally ridiculous to any one with an ounce of sense. Luckily or not, my sense was beaten out of me long ago after I met Jake Roberts back stage and p***ed him off.

http://www.canoe.ca/SlamWrestlingArchive/jan25_rhodes.html

How can you have a serious debate when this sort of stuff lurks in our subconscious?

Edited June 20, 2011 by SlimJim22

[Sleestak Lightning!]

I once thouroughly enjoyed the acrobatics and costume drama that was pro wrestling and then it was plagued by propaganda. As I recall I was approx 15 watching WCW on a friday night when limos would start pulling up and people would get out and beat the s**t into middle aged commentators and whoever got in the way. I know it was still an act and an upping of the drama but with hindsight this is where the demonization of the NWO in young minds began.

Eric Bishchoff was the instigator backed up by Ted Dibiase (RIP) and Hollywood Hogan. It was the beginning of the end for wrestling as nonpartizan entertainment and from then on it became about something more that the wrestling or personalities. It became about the money and the ego and the worst thing was that they recruited legends who'd fallen on hard times to play this part although few people at the time probably had any idea what the NWO was all about.

I'm not sure what books would have been around in 1997 that outed the Illuminati and NWO but it is now my opinion that this was some kind of subtle propaganda designed to fan the flames of fear and make people paranoid of Illuminist ideologies and instead of identifying them with sustainability or knowledge, when NWO is mentioned to any men of a certain age the first image they will get is not that of A Brave New World but a load of wrestlers in trunks and black vests with NwO written on them. What on earth is it all about? Maybe it is nothing but maybe it is some perverse way of creating apathy and confusion by making the terms of conflict seem totally ridiculous to any one with an ounce of sense. Luckily or not, my sense was beaten out of me long ago after I met Jake Roberts back stage and p***ed him off.

http://www.canoe.ca/SlamWrestlingArchive/jan25_rhodes.html

How can you have a serious debate when this sort of stuff lurks in our subconscious?

The Million Dollar Man is still alive, dude.

[me-wonders]

Hum, I think I would enjoy meeting with you and discussing your thoughts about the feminine energy. Have you noticed how some of the recent rebellions were triggered by women? There is also talk of women speaking to Taliban about ending the violence. I think in general, women fundamentally think differently from men. I am unclear about feminine power in the US. For sure it became taboo to be feminine and we crushed the feminine aspect as did Germany when the Prussians militarized Germany.

As for the education, I think liberal education is essential to our liberty. We replaced our liberal education with the German model of education for technology for military and industrial purpose, just years before "women's liberation" and the taboo against being feminine. Women had to be as men, and the pressure to be as men is still very strong! This most certainly did come with developing the military, industrial complex. I think it goes together. That is why I write. I want to raise awareness of what we did to education and of the importance of liberal education in defending our democracy with liberty. Germany was also a democracy, but it was a very authoritarian democracy, supported by Christian concepts of God's will and the need to obey authority.

You have to be an older person, because you stated the old world order education values, and are aware of the new world order values. The US modeled its education after Athens education for well rounded individual development. When we had liberal education, we understood equality, didn't mean the same. Each god and goddess is distinctly different and yet they are equal. This thinking evolved over time, and involves several philosophical questions.

We need a working understanding of logos, and the family of gods, which we just do not have. But let us focus on order, because this is the really important issue.

The picture of the girls holding weapons, and comments about rebellion, demonstrates such a complete lack of understanding of the subject. Some children do carry weapons and can even make them. They have made headlines by entering their schools armed, and then proceeded to kill teachers and students. Years ago, the young man down the street from where I lived, who attended the same high school my daughter attended, killed his parents before killing as many students as he could at the school. Such acts of violence have been repeated, and finally there was mention of a school culture that leads to such violence. Thurston High was excessively impersonal, and clickish, and the staff was very much part of the problem. Around this time a public commentator said, teachers should not have to waste their time on poor students, and this was a very popular statement. This is a complete changed from the original purpose of public education, and it manifests a very different culture. How do we talk about this in such away people become aware of what has happened to education and our culture?

We have the history of Germany, and it has been said we replaced our liberal education with Germany's model of education for technology, and we have established this was done for military purpose. This education is very much about specialization, and what is taught is dictated by military needs, not liberal ideas of humanity and what a meaningful life is all about. We have completely lost the understanding of what education has to do with liberty and the pursuit of happiness. And we remain blind to the social ramifications of this change in public education. We know the divorce rate is high, and that few families sit together at the dinner table, and that we have become more materialistic, yet seem to deny the major change in family life. We know Hitler began with the youth, and that these youths were more loyal to the state than the family, and would report their own families to authority, and as we see this developing in our own country, we remain blind to significant change. Oh, I am not speaking of your family. Your family of course is just like an ideal 1950 family, with Mom staying home and devoted to the family, and you all have dinner together and think your family is the most important thing in the world, but it is those other families I am talking about.

Edited June 22, 2011 by me-wonders