My thoughts on this are kind of half-and-half. I believe that the NWO theory is certainly the reality, but I don't believe in the exact explanations offered. They range from plasuible-to-far-fetched to say the least. However, the problem with most plausible conspiracy theories I hear is that they over-reach. At the core of some, I believe there is a solid concern or truth. Something is definitely wrong. Something doesn't add up. It's when they explain it that it begins to derail because I believe they try to bridge fact and ignorance with conjecture. For instance. The NWO, in it's general sense, is hardly "new". Nations have been playing this game since the beginning. You could think of human civilization- from the beginning till now- as one long game of Monopoly-plus-Risk. There are many players, but only a few people really control the board through their control of the mediums of human civilization. (money, reosurces, force, etc) There have always been those who try to take it all. If you truly believe that is the stuff of the past, or that your government, wherever you are, is not like that, it is a shame... There are bullies and victims, but the only true thing separating one system of control from another is the ability to project that control. But second...many conspiracy theorists like to explain the "grand, ancient plan", as if world domination was a plot hatched by a secret group of ancient asshooles that have managed to remain fairly cohesive for centuries- steadily working their ambition into reality. This, I believe, is a misdirection. I think it's a matter of evolution and observation. The mighty come and go, but the next generation take heed of the former and learn. They keep what works and try new methods- and some things are even incidental. Some conspiracy theorists are convinced that money was invented to enslave people. This probably isn't true. It was an honest system that evolved from the exhange of excess. However, over time, there were likely those that have observed the traits and trends of humanity, and as civilization became more dependent on this medium of exchange, it became clear that the people who amassed the most control over the medium of exchange could exert influence and/or control in the society. This is like saying that lead was invented in order to make bullets. I honestly love to think about the question of NWO because, for me, it's not a "kooky theory" but it symbolizes a turn from the traditional. Traditonally, we are used to seeing empires rise to take control of everything, but that is only because empires were the best way to project control by a certain group. However, that has changed. There are more ways, and I believe the "conquering kind" are always tying to solve Alexander's Puzzle- How Does One Become Ruler of All? I don't believe I'll live to see the outcome, but I certainly believe that the traditional reach for total power and control is still alive. We just don't understand the new form it is taking, yet. And far from the singular plan of a secret and ancient cabal, it's an idea that constantly evolves through the steady observation, experimentation, and execution of controlling parties in whatever form they come across. People will be looking for a powerful state to rise, but does the State-government really possess the greatest power in the world, today? Which leads to my next area... Government vs Economy? Who's the bigger demon? One group says the Government is controlling the economy. The other says the economy is controlling the government. In truth, Government and economy have always worked side-by-side to promote each others interest. But, you'll notice that the governments of any society have always served and acted to protect and project the economic interests of their civilization. The concept was that governments and economy existed in mutual dependence. The issue with the present is that we have already reached a time where the economic branch is becoming increasingly independent of the need to endorse individual states. They no longer need the protection of one country, and thus do not ally themselves to any one country or it's people. This must be considered when you realize the true purpose of the state-government and the nation. It's not a "home" for people, so to speak. It is a grand political-administration designed to organize people's labor. The government "manages" people. It aligns the affairs of the populace to the economic interests of it's higher groups. The goverment has always been middle-men or economic players, themselves, as in the old days the governments control of force granted them absolute control of everything. There may be some who rebel against this because they adhere to the poetic, aesthetic visions of the nation as a warm homeland that protects and nurtures them...I can only hope this is youth. In short...everyone operates, generally, out of self-interest. Though we call ourselves a nation, nothing really connects us and we are generally unaware of anybody not directly connected to us. Such is the same for government and the economy. They don't see YOU every day, they see each other. They work amongst, talk, and converse with one another- thus they develop a concentrated repour amnst themselves where they serve one anothers interests- to our exclusion, detriment, or benefit. Some people believe letting the ecomony do its job will save us all. Some people think letting the government power-up will save us. I believe, if you've been paying attention, it's obvious that the government serves the economic interests of the nation. The problem is that the economic interests become increasingly divorced from national concerns and the political branch is stressed to do it's job- serving the economic interests while maintaining public consent and control. If you can see what is happening, in general, the economic branches of the world- while there are still sources of conflict- have become a sort of megalithic structure functioning aboe the political level. Indeed, political fallout is determined by what happens in economics. Some say the rise of the economic elite symbolizes the coming of the New World Order. That, I argue, has always been the reality. The only new thing would be one group actually managing to take control of everything. (this will not resemble perfect control. No empire has ever had perfect control, nor was th ruling of the empire completele colhesive in that their were not internal conflicts among them). In the past, government was once master of economy. Later, it became partner to economy with the rule of law. After that,economy becomes increasinlgy independent of indivdiual government. So...the move to annex everything into a single economic block is a natural evolution of human civilization...complete with all the horrors and/or beneifts you can imagine. The funny thing is that even if this NWO is achieved, it won't really be a singular rule because the inevitable internal conflicts that arise will fragment the "monolithic entity" as surely as the former poltiical issues did. It would be like the US...we are, technically, a unified nation only in the fact that we are held together by an overarching government. But, without that presence, we would have been fractured into smaller pieces due to internal conflicts of every sort. Well...the future is unknown. I have my theories. I love hearing about this stuff and wondering what people think is going to happen in the future of politics of the world, so if you want, you can share your ideas about what you think is happening or will happen in the future of the US below, no matter how long. It's good to hear a persons complete thoughts worded out.
American democracy is the New World Order and, if the Illuminati do exist, they created America as we know it.
