Ο ΕΧΘΡΟΣ ΜΑΣ ΕΙΝΑΙ Η ΠΑΓΚΟΣΜΙΑ ΔΙΑΚΥΒΕΡΝΗΣΗ!

Κάποτε ο εχθρός ήταν ο ιμπεριαλισμός σήμερα όμως είναι η παγκοσμια κυβερνηση.

Η δικτατορία που θα διαλύσει κάθε έννοια ανθρώπινου δικαιώματος.

Ο σπόνσορας της παγκόσμιας κυβέρνησης που βρίσκεται στην εξουσία στην Ελλάδα προχωρά το σχέδιο με χειρουργική ακρίβεια.

Αγκαλιάζει τις τράπεζες και τους διεθνείς κερδοσκόπους και μας παίρνει το ψωμί απο το στόμα.

Εκδίδει κάρτες και καρτούλες για να μας υποδουλώσει οικονομικά και να καταστρέψει όποιον αντισταθεί.

Η αστική δημοκρατία μας τελείωσε.

Ζούμε πλέον στην αρχή της παγκόσμιας διακυβέρνησης.

Απαθείς περιμένουμε το μοιραίο.

Μάλιστα σκοπεύουν να στησουν ολοκληρωτικά την παγκόσμια διακυβέρνηση μέχρι το 2025.

Και για του λόγου το αληθές διαβάστε πώς οραματίζονται την παγκόσμια διακυβέρνηση.

Global governance by 2025?

U.S. intelligence network, EU elitists push for single common political authority

---

 

Those who still doubt that globalization is an agenda for global governance, not just for free trade, should consult a new report just published by the U.S. National Intelligence Council in conjunction with the European Union Institute for Securities Studies, titled «Global Governance 2025: At a Critical Junction.»

Upon reading the 69-page document, the conclusion is inescapable that the U.S. and EU intelligence apparatus is setting the stage for one-world government by 2025.

The document presumes globalism is unstoppable, driven by free-trade economics, and that the United States has no choice but to compromise sovereignty to accommodate the demands of the globalism.

«Interdependence has been a feature of economic globalization for many years, but the rise of China, India, Brazil, and other fast-growing economies has taken economic interdependence to a new level,» the document states. «The multiple links among climate change and resource issues; the economic crisis; and state fragility – ‘hubs’ of risks for the future – illustrate the interconnected nature of challenges on the international agenda today.»

The words in bold in the above paragraph were printed in bold in the document, evidently so the reader did not lose sight of the point that we are all tied together in a common globe in which nation states are not to be taken as the primary unit of analysis.

So, in addition to free trade and a global economy, the U.S. and EU intelligence apparatus sees virtually every other major public policy issue as a reason for global governance, not as an arena in which individual nation states bear the responsibility for solutions particular to their sovereign people.

An additional conclusion would be that any crisis – for instance a starvation crisis in Africa, or a flu epidemic in Canada – would be taken as international catastrophe requiring a global governance solution.

Multipolar world

The next major theme of the document is that the world is multipolar, i.e., not capable of analysis by nation states one-by-one, but by regional and global crises in which important regional nation state actors need to subjugate their nation state interest to the regional or global interests defined in a multipolar world.

«The shift to a multipolar world is complicating the prospects for effective global governance over the next 10 years,» the executive summary continues. «The expanding economic clout of emerging powers increases their political influence well beyond their borders.»

In other words, the United States needs to step down as the world’s sole superpower make way for what is known in globalism circles as «BRIC» – namely, the emerging nations of Brazil, Russia, India and China.

Potential scenarios

The document ends with the presentation of four «fictionalized scenarios» that the intelligence planners in the U.S. and EU argue «could result if, as we believe likely, the multiple and diverse governance frameworks struggle to keep pace with the looming number of transnational and global challenges.»

Projecting forward over the next 15 years, the four scenarios are:

1. Barely keeping afloat. Viewed as the most likely over the next few years, «no one crisis will be so overwhelming as to threaten the international system even though collective management advances slowly.»

2. Fragmentation. «Powerful states and regions try to wall themselves off from outside threats,» as Asia builds a regional order that is economically self-sufficient and Europe turns inward «as it wrestles with growing discontent and declining living standards»; the United States is constrained by budgetary shortfalls and long-term debt problems.

3. Concert of Europe redux. Here, «severe threats to the international system – possibly a looming environmental disaster or a conflict that risks spreading – prompt cooperation on solving global problems»; the U.S. «increasingly shares power while China and India increase their burden sharing and the EU takes on a bigger global role.

4. Gaming reality: Conflict trumps cooperation. Viewed as the least likely scenario, the «international system becomes threatening owing to domestic disruptions, particularly in emerging powers such as China»; nationalistic pressures build as the economically hard-pressed middle class in the U.S. finds its desire for the «good life» stymied; tensions build between the U.S. and China, as well as among some of the BRIC countries as competition grows for resources and clients.

There is nothing in the entire document to suggest the U.S. intelligence community has any faith left in the future of America to act as a sovereign nation capable of solving national problems.

From the text, the impression is clear that the U.S. and EU intelligence planners are almost hoping for a good global crisis of whatever kind, just so the end result is global governance.

Just to reassure backward-minded readers who still feel nostalgia for the U.S. or nation-states as a concept, the document ends cautiously.

«Global governance is not slated to approach ‘world government’ because of widespread sovereignty concerns, divergent interests and deep-seated worries about the effectiveness of current institutions,» the conclusion states. «However, enhanced and more effective cooperation among a growing assortment of international, regional and national in addition to non-state actors is possible, achievable and needed, particularly to grapple with the growing interconnectedness of future challenges.»