- JoNova - https://www.joannenova.com.au -

“Conspiracy theorist” – just another form of namecalling from the class who want to be Global Rulers

“Conspiracy Theorist” – the taunt you use when you want to “win” the debate without having to argue your point.

When someone points out that the Regulating Class want to bring on a world government, they’re called a “conspiracy theorist”. When the king-pins of the Regulating Class, or their media apostles, actually admit they rather love the idea of a world government, where are the retractions? They can’t hold an honest conversation, let alone budget, plan and spend your money wisely.

Gary Stix – former Scientific American writer – blogs that he used to edit articles on nuclear fusion and clean coal, but now thinks he ought to have written more on psychology, sociology and economics. (See, when their attempts at logic, reason and evidence don’t win over the crowd, the anointed need to explain how stupid, flawed and selfish people are.)

Effective World Government Will Be Needed to Stave Off Climate Catastrophe

Unfortunately, far more is needed. To be effective, a new set of institutions would have to be imbued with heavy-handed, transnational enforcement powers. There would have to be consideration of some way of embracing head-in-the-cloud answers to social problems that are usually dismissed by policymakers as academic naivete. In principle, species-wide alteration in basic human behaviors would be a sine qua non, but that kind of pronouncement also profoundly strains credibility in the chaos of the political sphere. Some of the things that would need to be contemplated: How do we overcome our hard-wired tendency to “discount” the future: valuing what we have today more than what we might receive tomorrow? Would any institution be capable of instilling a permanent crisis mentality lasting decades, if not centuries? How do we create new institutions with enforcement powers way beyond the current mandate of the U.N.?

[Scientific American Blog]

Stix goes on to wonder: Could we ensure against a malevolent dictator who might abuse the power of such organizations?

Dear Gary, could we? Let’s check the current UN record for success? They are the visionaries guarding-little-citizens who put Gaddafi in charge of “human rights”, and North Korea in charge of Nuclear Disarmament. Last week they endorsed a 2010 report where some of the worlds most repressive governments like Algeria, Iran, and Syria  praised the Gaddafi regime’s human rights record. Not a single country objected. OK. So you think these are people that ought to have even more power over us? These guys are not even trying, not even pretending anymore that they need to look nice and rational. There is not even a pretense. Gaddafi thinks “human rights” means he has the right to bombs his own people and the big news is that UN is “thinking” twice about hailing him as a humanitarian hero?

But  the UN are thinking about reviewing their 2010 report that praised Gaddafi’s human rights record. So that’s alright then.

Protection against malevolent dictators comes from a free press and a free vote, and most of the world doesn’t have that, and even the parts that do are suffering from big-governmentitis. The best protection from dictators comes from competing nation states, competing media outlets, competing companies, competing political parties, and … you get the idea. The best way to guarantee global tyranny is have a global government.

Bob Brown advocated for one world parliament

The Age

GREENS leader Bob Brown – whose party assumes sole balance of power in the Senate tomorrow – wants Australia to join an international push for a global parliament. This ”people’s assembly” would be based on one person, one vote, one value and was being vigorously promoted in Europe and the United Nations, he said yesterday. (See the Youtube)

In the Hunt for a new Vocabulary

The English language can’t keep up with the Certified Global Nonsense. We don’t even have the words to describe the convoluted situations the alarmist-big-government brains think up. What is the word to encompass a situation where the people throwing the insults condescendingly disdain those they oppose, even as they agree with them? What is it — apart from a random tribal missive of hypocrisy? Please suggest words from other languages, acronyms or an entirely new word. Time to brainstorm.

H/t to Australian Climate Madness


Other related posts:

UN totalitarians want your money and your life

Billions of dollars sneaks out the door through UN committees

BREAKING NEWS! The abdication of the West — the sting at Cancun

Ecocide? Bring it on (in a Western government court).

Flashback to Bali: UN tactics to silence dissent


9.5 out of 10 based on 71 ratings