General

Re: New World Order: Ancap Perspectives

tfr000 — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 20:15:04 GMT

And my favorite NWO conspiracy: Look on the back of a Federal Reserve Note... "Novus Ordo Seclorum". It doesn't quite mean "New World Order", but almost!

Re: New World Order: Ancap Perspectives

liberty student — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 19:44:28 GMT

alimentarius:

I don't believe the government's explanation either. I don't trust anyone regarding 911.

Hurrah! Bravo!

Re: New World Order: Ancap Perspectives

alimentarius — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 14:46:51 GMT

I don't believe the government's explanation either. I don't trust anyone regarding 911.

Re: New World Order: Ancap Perspectives

Sieben — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 14:31:30 GMT

Well... you have Europe in the EU with more centralization every day and a universal currency... You have everyone in the UN talking about the African Union and an African currency... And you have the great pan american highway they've been trying to build for sometime as well as Geithner saying that they are seriously considering a pan american currency...

It certainly looks like things are getting more and more centralized... imo who cares if there's 1 world government. Wouldn't it be just as bad if there were only 2 or 3 world governments that did exactly the same thing? This is what we're headed towards now. World government maybe sometime in the future. They won't need to though if the world currencies are all controlled by the same group. They can just inflate and take whatever they want...

Re: New World Order: Ancap Perspectives

Justin Spahr-Summers — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 10:05:57 GMT

demosthenes:
2. Would it be sustainable?

3. Is it possible for a small elite to be able to control the world markets to the extent claimed by the NWO ilk?

No, and no. I'm a bit more optimistic than some of the other posters in this thread. Personally, I think there are a lot of freedom-loving people spread about the world. Because different states with differing levels of freedom exist, someone can still find a place "good enough," or can travel about to avoid the rule of any one state. If these options were no longer viable, I think there'd be a lot more protest, which would hopefully lead to a decentralization of power.

(Sorry if this made no sense. I'm kind of in a mental funk right now.)

Re: New World Order: Ancap Perspectives

bbnet — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 07:09:30 GMT

Here's a writing by modernist poet Ezra Pound from 1944 that might give the NWOers some more ammo?

America, Roosevelt and the causes of the present war

Makes for a good quick read from a variety of angles, not just for the conspiracy theorists.

Re: New World Order: Ancap Perspectives

The Late Andrew Ryan — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 04:23:44 GMT

I consider NWO to be an irrelevent but real possibility.

The state needs to go and we must alway be on our guard against it, PERIOD.

Re: New World Order: Ancap Perspectives

demosthenes — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 04:22:38 GMT

Thanks everybody. I guess the reason I am asking is because if the stuff is true, it would be good to know in order to invest wisely. If there really is some sort of method to their madness, I'd rather be in a position to exploit it than to be victimized by it. I don't want to be investing in stocks or real estate or what have you when what I should really be investing in is long-term foodstuffs and guns. Or, say, if there was some way to discern how long it will be before the shit hits the proverbial fan, I would like to be able to detect important trends in order to accumulate as much wealth as possible beforehand and use it to its maximum advantage after the fact.

Of course I consider the ancap perspective to be primary, and that philosophically it doesn't really matter if there is a NWO/OWG type deal. I just want to know the truth in order to use it to my advantage. I mean just by learning about the banking deal has already put me at a considerable advantage relatively speaking.

Re: New World Order: Ancap Perspectives

Conza88 — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 03:52:57 GMT

kiba:
The Soviet Union parasites may be cold and calculating but they're too dumb to maintain a communist state. The only reason that they exists for so long is because of United States food tributes, or so I heard.

Yes... except the world government isn't going to be a communist state.

The reason the SU existed so long was because that is how long the highest order goods would last. Mises said around 70 years and he was right. [Anyone correct me on this? Couldn't find the proper article where I previously read this]

It wouldn't surprise me that the US aided the Soviet Union.

Re: New World Order: Ancap Perspectives

kiba — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 03:34:54 GMT

Conza88:

"Far from being a paranoid or a determinist, the conspiracy analyst is a praxeologist; that is, he believes that people act purposively, that they make conscious choices to employ means in order to arrive at goals. Hence, if a steel tariff is passed, he assumes that the steel industry lobbied for it; if a public works project is created, he hypothesizes that it was promoted by an alliance of construction firms and unions who enjoyed public works contracts, and bureaucrats who expanded their jobs and incomes. It is the opponents of "conspiracy" analysis who profess to believe that all events — at least in government —are random and unplanned, and that therefore people do not engage in purposive choice and planning."

- Conspiracy Theory of History Revisited by Murray Rothbard

The Soviet Union parasites may be cold and calculating but they're too dumb to maintain a communist state. The only reason that they exists for so long is because of United States food tributes, or so I heard.

Re: New World Order: Ancap Perspectives

Conza88 — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 03:24:13 GMT

alimentarius:

He is not, but those who believe in replitians, FEMA concentration camps

The reptilians is complete bs. Concentration camps... they haven't been used by tyrannical governments before? What history books haven't you been reading?

alimentarius:
911 inside job etc, those are conspiracy theorists.

You're a conspiracy theorist. The difference is - you believe the establishments conspiracy theory.

Pay No Attention to That Man Behind the Screen by Butler Shaffer

Recorded 10/15/2004 at Radical Scholarship: The Guerrilla Movement for Liberty [19:29]

http://mises.org/multimedia/mp3/RadicalScholarship/SS-Schaffer.mp3

"You might also be aware of Operation North woods scam"

"That in the early 1960's the Joint Chiefs of Staff had put together a plan directed towards an eventual attack on Cuba. And part of this plan would be for people in the United States to be shot in the streets, planes to be hijacked and destroyed, terrorist acts to be carried out in major cities, bombings and so forth. Innocent people to be framed for these bombings. All for the purpose of blaming Castro, in order to rationalize a war in Cuba."

"The Cold War itself was premised on an international communist conspiracy. And those of us who denied this and saw the Cold War as a scheme for perfect state interests were attacked by the anti-conspiracy league as "paranoid conspiracy theorists".

"But it's interesting, right after 9/11 we have George Bush getting on television and telling us "Let us have no Conspiracy theories about all of this".

"He then began expouting on his own conspiracy theory. It was Al Qaeda, Axis of Evil, International Terrorist Networks, Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein."

"In otherwords, any conspiracy theories that are outside the realm of what is politically correct are not to be examined. Stick to the conspiracy theories we give you and you'll be alright. Those who believe in the establishment conspiracies are patriots. Those who suspect the establishment of their own conspiracies are paranoid. 'They conspire but we do not.'"

"Paranoia in this connection is not a fear of others, but a baseless fear of others. What would one say of a Jewish person in Nazi Germany who thought the government was out too get him? Paranoid? If so, what would you say about about another Jewish person in Nazi Germany who didn't think the government was out to get him? Psychologically healthy?

"Does 'paranoid' in fact not describe the state of mind of US officials who see all of us as potential terrorists." etc etc.

"Far from being a paranoid or a determinist, the conspiracy analyst is a praxeologist; that is, he believes that people act purposively, that they make conscious choices to employ means in order to arrive at goals. Hence, if a steel tariff is passed, he assumes that the steel industry lobbied for it; if a public works project is created, he hypothesizes that it was promoted by an alliance of construction firms and unions who enjoyed public works contracts, and bureaucrats who expanded their jobs and incomes. It is the opponents of "conspiracy" analysis who profess to believe that all events — at least in government —are random and unplanned, and that therefore people do not engage in purposive choice and planning."

- Conspiracy Theory of History Revisited by Murray Rothbard

Re: New World Order: Ancap Perspectives

Conza88 — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 03:07:41 GMT

demosthenes:
I've been browsing dozens of Facebook pages and blogs lately, and there seems to be a pretty strong NWO movement. I'm not too versed on the subject, and before I spend a lot of time doing the research, I would like to know some of your guys's perspective on the subject.

It's not something to really waste too much time on. I did a fair amount of inquiry and got to know their endgame. I'd recommend others do the same - and I could point towards stuff that can help enlighten. I stopped down this path however, when I started investigating / learning Austrian Economics.

Austrian Economics / Libertarianism makes that whole venture / avenue [conspiracy explanations] of convincing / converting people fairly redundant. There you have to compel people to do their own research and investigate themselves etc. The superiority of AE and Libertarianism, is the factor of logic and apriori. You can argue against the NWO... but you don't need to mention any of the conspiracy element, because that is secondary. It's far more effective.

demosthenes:
1. Is it something to be worried about, or would it just be a relatively small step forward for statism? Statism already has the whole world by the balls, is it really that serious?

Well as we know monopolies are bad. Global government has surely got to be the biggest one of all.

demosthenes:
2. Would it be sustainable?

I hope not... but these guys aren't dumb. The same things will be necessary to start a revolution, as you would within your own country / nation - to dissolve the state. This will make it harder (UN will just send troops in) the "peacekeepers", to quell dissent. You can easily see a Pakistani division corps being sent in to control the people in India if there is unrest.

Think of it as the same as your government, just on a much grander scale. The problem is the parasites... have a lot more hosts to live off... and it will NOT be a fully communist state - there will not be central planning in everything.

There will be markets, they just won't be free. The parasites will glean as much as they can.

demosthenes:
3. Is it possible for a small elite to be able to control the world markets to the extent claimed by the NWO ilk?

Not to the extent they claim, but they establish the framework. See; IMF, World Central Bank and they own the printing presses etc.

Ron Paul Speech - One World Government

"The only question to be answered with right now is; what is it going to be replaced with?

Believe me they are working very hard to devise a new system. They are talking about an international fiat currency paper system, with the loss of US national sovereignty.

"We have to stop this move towards one world government and one world currency."

Ron Paul on Barack Obama and New World Order

"McCain was obviously the back up candidate if Obama didn't win"

"They've been positioning Obama for a long, long time"

"You know the plans are laid for him to take care of the corporate elite"

Future is Calling - G. Edward Griffin

Ron Paul: Bad Foreign Policy Started with Woodrow Wilson

"Ron Paul can you speak about the NWO's plan for a one world government? Will they succeed?"

Ron Paul:- "They'll succeed if we don't do anything about it."

The Drive for a World Central Bank by Hans-Hermann Hoppe

"Before I will explain why there is a drive towards a world bank."

"Why is there a drive towards world government?"

"Because the drive to a world bank, can be best understood by an intermediary step in the underlining drive to world government."

Re: New World Order: Ancap Perspectives

alimentarius — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 23:17:14 GMT

He is not, but those who believe in replitians, FEMA concentration camps, 911 inside job etc, those are conspiracy theorists.

Re: New World Order: Ancap Perspectives

wilderness — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 23:12:16 GMT

alimentarius:

No idea. He mentioned "NWO", but said noth9ing about what it means.

true. he didn't say what he means by it extensively in those videos. Is he a conspiracy theorist because he mentions 'new world order'?

Re: New World Order: Ancap Perspectives

alimentarius — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 22:51:10 GMT

No idea. He mentioned "NWO", but said noth9ing about what it means. I don't think he means a one world government led by reptilians, that aims to microchip us all, make us their slaves, send us to FEMA camps and reduce the world population to 500 million.