|
|
Post by assisi on Mar 17, 2019 18:23:09 GMT
First, happy St. Patrick's day to everyone.
As a result of probably having spent too much time on the internet over the last few years, I keep coming across references to certain groups that many commentators (particularly in the comments sections below particular internet articles) cite as the source of the current push towards globalism, the 'new world order', that we are now witnessing.
The top candidates seem to be:
1. Jews, or Zionism
2. Freemasons
3. Banking and financial elites such as the Rothschilds
4. Satanists
Below these big hitters are the more visible practitioners of globalism: cultural marxists in the universities and media and transnational organisations such as the EU and United Nations. Mentioned in despatches are CIA, deep state government in the U.S.,the Vatican, the historic illuminati, DAVOS group and probably others I have missed out.
Do you think that there is a mysterious cabal directing our current messed up world politics or is that idea a result of a febrile conspiracy-obsessed mentality? Or is it more likely we have simply come to a point in history where a hybrid of postmodernism, marxism and consumerism is the fashionable nurtured idea that is having its day in the sun?
|
|
|
|
Post by Séamus on Mar 19, 2019 6:04:49 GMT
I daresay it is all a combination.
There would still be anti-Christian-society engine-rooms such as some of the ones you mentioned here and there. But by-and-large the general population has probably taken on the ideology without belonging to anything.
Freemasonry, mostly the Scottish branch, had been very influential in Western Australia, lodges existing in every older suburb and town. But most are closed now and several of the lodges are considered to be heritage buildings and are utilised for other purposes, one,I know,is a kindergarten for autism-spectrum children.
Why would anyone bother joining them when Society is now really what Freemasonry always wanted- secular, urbane, without any absolute moral compass (except when it comes to extreme issues)? Sure, the original lodges would have liked Catholicism and monarchy to disappear altogether, but neither of these institutions today have any real influence on the majority of lives, which is what masonry wanted.
An indication of what Society has become was seen in a book review published in last weekend's West Australian paper. Two pages advertising a 'chick-lit' novel (by an L.Swinn) about abortion, which seems to basically be a call for Australian states to drop all restrictions, few of which are observed anyway(something she would be well aware of.) A novel written as indoctrination is usually quite weak, but this seems extreme.
" 'I'm sorry' said the woman behind the counter,'you have to be a resident of South Australia for at least two months to have a legal termination in SA', she says, and your knees go out from underneath you. It didn't make sense... Someone gets you a cup of water and you gather your thoughts for a few minutes before leaving. Outside the protesters recognise you and think you've had a change of heart, and one woman grabs you crying"
Oh please!
|
|
|
|
Post by cato on Mar 19, 2019 12:53:56 GMT
I daresay it is all a combination. There would still be anti-Christian-society engine-rooms such as some of the ones you mentioned here and there. But by-and-large the general population has probably taken on the ideology without belonging to anything. Freemasonry, mostly the Scottish branch, had been very influential in Western Australia, lodges existing in every older suburb and town. But most are closed now and several of the lodges are considered to be heritage buildings and are utilised for other purposes, one,I know,is a kindergarten for autism-spectrum children. Why would anyone bother joining them when Society is now really what Freemasonry always wanted- secular, urbane, without any absolute moral compass (except when it comes to extreme issues)? Sure, the original lodges would have liked Catholicism and monarchy to disappear altogether, but neither of these institutions today have any real influence on the majority of lives, which is what masonry wanted. An indication of what Society has become was seen in a book review published in last weekend's West Australian paper. Two pages advertising a 'chick-lit' novel (by an L.Swinn) about abortion, which seems to basically be a call for Australian states to drop all restrictions, few of which are observed anyway(something she would be well aware of.) A novel written as indoctrination is usually quite weak, but this seems extreme. " 'I'm sorry' said the woman behind the counter,'you have to be a resident of South Australia for at least two months to have a legal termination in SA', she says, and your knees go out from underneath you. It didn't make sense... Someone gets you a cup of water and you gather your thoughts for a few minutes before leaving. Outside the protesters recognise you and think you've had a change of heart, and one woman grabs you crying" Oh please! Well put. Spot on. One of the weaknesses of the right and I suppose of the left too is to blame all the world's ills on some kind of tiny but very powerful conspiracy. I don't deny conspiracies do exist but it is misleadingly comforting to imagine most people aren't content with secularist materialism. One of the wake up calls for Irish conservatives last year was the Repeal vote which showed that the idea there was a silent moral majority was simply a myth , at least by 2018. |
|
|
|
Post by assisi on Mar 19, 2019 14:56:13 GMT
I daresay it is all a combination. There would still be anti-Christian-society engine-rooms such as some of the ones you mentioned here and there. But by-and-large the general population has probably taken on the ideology without belonging to anything. Freemasonry, mostly the Scottish branch, had been very influential in Western Australia, lodges existing in every older suburb and town. But most are closed now and several of the lodges are considered to be heritage buildings and are utilised for other purposes, one,I know,is a kindergarten for autism-spectrum children. Why would anyone bother joining them when Society is now really what Freemasonry always wanted- secular, urbane, without any absolute moral compass (except when it comes to extreme issues)? Sure, the original lodges would have liked Catholicism and monarchy to disappear altogether, but neither of these institutions today have any real influence on the majority of lives, which is what masonry wanted. An indication of what Society has become was seen in a book review published in last weekend's West Australian paper. Two pages advertising a 'chick-lit' novel (by an L.Swinn) about abortion, which seems to basically be a call for Australian states to drop all restrictions, few of which are observed anyway(something she would be well aware of.) A novel written as indoctrination is usually quite weak, but this seems extreme. " 'I'm sorry' said the woman behind the counter,'you have to be a resident of South Australia for at least two months to have a legal termination in SA', she says, and your knees go out from underneath you. It didn't make sense... Someone gets you a cup of water and you gather your thoughts for a few minutes before leaving. Outside the protesters recognise you and think you've had a change of heart, and one woman grabs you crying" Oh please! It would be great to 'know thy enemy' and clearly see who is at the top of the pyramid (if anyone). But as you say it is probably a host of groups that are coalescing around the new globalist ideal. All of them will see advantages to a new globalist world order: Centralised Government: They will surely be seduced by the power that they will hold if intermediary influences such as family, Church and Nation are neutered. Multinational Companies: If we become more and more isolated individuals, devoid of spiritual nourishment, we will try to consume our way out of our existential misery by trying to buy happiness and identity. For pharma and healthcare companies the increase in anxiety and depression will generate a demand for new pills and new wellness initiatives. Also an increasingly undifferentiated global market will exist for their services. Banks: The more consumption the more personal debt build up. Also again an increasingly undifferentiated global market for their services. Media: There will be a compliant mainstream media that will reflect and reinforce the values of the above entities. The BBCs, RTEs, Irish Times, Guardian or their new global equivalents. They will be in receipt of government subsidy should they need it. Universities: They will be looked upon benignly by the powers-that-be as long as they churn out young people indoctrinated in the globalist mentality. Entertainment Industry: Like the Universities, keep churning out movies and music that is politically correct. |
|
|
|
Post by Séamus on Mar 21, 2019 0:05:06 GMT
You would wonder why, on a global scale, large banks and other corporations can be so keen to push issues such as changing the definition of marriage.
It's hardly for financial profits alone.
And yet some of the largest corporations now are the internet giants, which have been shown , since Trump and Brexit,to have a double-edge-sword influence
|
|
|
|
Post by assisi on Mar 21, 2019 10:08:06 GMT
You would wonder why, on a global scale, large banks and other corporations can be so keen to push issues such as changing the definition of marriage. It's hardly for financial profits alone. And yet some of the largest corporations now are the internet giants, which have been shown , since Trump and Brexit,to have a double-edge-sword influence I always thought that a marriage breakup, particular legal divorce, was a great moneyspinner for companies, banks and the legal profession. First the legal teams will benefit financially from the divorce, the messier the better. Let's say the husband moves out, he will probably have to rent or buy a small dwelling (estate agents, banks for mortgages, property companies all involved). The ex-husband (or wife) may need a new car, may need to furnish a flat and may need to work longer to finance this and any settlement. There may be further spin offs if the ex husband buys separate gifts for his kids Christmases and birthdays or has separate parties. He may stretch to a separate holiday or weekend for his kids. He may wish to take them out for a meal..... He may also join the singles brigade, with dating agencies, joining fitness classes to make himself more attractive, dine out with prospective new partners, take up hobbies to meet people. A veritable industry surrounds the whole process. Unfortunately short termism is the order of the day for the companies and banks. The longer term consequences of all this, the chaos, isolation and mental burden of all this may well rebound on these institutions (and society at large) eventually. |
|
|
|
Post by cato on Mar 21, 2019 13:48:29 GMT
Companies and banks have been employing psychologists since the the 1960s to persuade us how to part with our cash. I doubt whether the harmful aspects of a spend spend spend culture are of any concern to them.
The Celtic tiger and wider international boom of the early 2000s was fueled largely by credit. It was assumed constantly rising wages would pay for this. This wasn't economics . It was a tarted up ponzi scheme promoted by our politicians , media and international cheer leaders. Most of those who pushed this nonsense walked away with tidy profits .
|
|
|
|
Post by cato on Mar 21, 2019 13:54:01 GMT
Media: There will be a compliant mainstream media that will reflect and reinforce the values of the above entities. The BBCs, RTEs, Irish Times, Guardian or their new global equivalents. They will be in receipt of government subsidy should they need it.
Universities: They will be looked upon benignly by the powers-that-be as long as they churn out young people indoctrinated in the globalist mentality.
Entertainment Industry: Like the Universities, keep churning out movies and music that is politically correct.
[/quote]
There has been a move to provide tax payers cash to newspapers in Ireland. Fianna Fail have been advocating this for some time. Our fearlessly independent media would of course become even more impartial when they receive large wads of our cash.
|
|
|
|
Post by Séamus on Mar 23, 2019 4:16:51 GMT
You would wonder why, on a global scale, large banks and other corporations can be so keen to push issues such as changing the definition of marriage. It's hardly for financial profits alone. And yet some of the largest corporations now are the internet giants, which have been shown , since Trump and Brexit,to have a double-edge-sword influence I always thought that a marriage breakup, particular legal divorce, was a great moneyspinner for companies, banks and the legal profession. First the legal teams will benefit financially from the divorce, the messier the better. Let's say the husband moves out, he will probably have to rent or buy a small dwelling (estate agents, banks for mortgages, property companies all involved). The ex-husband (or wife) may need a new car, may need to furnish a flat and may need to work longer to finance this and any settlement. There may be further spin offs if the ex husband buys separate gifts for his kids Christmases and birthdays or has separate parties. He may stretch to a separate holiday or weekend for his kids. He may wish to take them out for a meal..... He may also join the singles brigade, with dating agencies, joining fitness classes to make himself more attractive, dine out with prospective new partners, take up hobbies to meet people. A veritable industry surrounds the whole process. Unfortunately short termism is the order of the day for the companies and banks. The longer term consequences of all this, the chaos, isolation and mental burden of all this may well rebound on these institutions (and society at large) eventually. I was thinking of also, for example-. Of Australia's four major banks, three sponsored the campaign for gay marriage, while one did so through a subsidiary that it had bought over decades ago. And yet, if there's so much economical advantage in everyone marrying, they don't seem terribly enthused about encouraging co-inhabiting hetero couples to do so. And you can wonder, then,whether it is all fiscal or whether changing the World's order is a thrust behind big-business senarios like this? |
|
