• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans


Adverts help to support the work of this non-profit organisation. To go ad-free join as a Member.


Photo
* * * * * 1 votes

Donald Trump vs The New World Order

immigration trade socialism media israel globalism america donald trump conspiracy new world order

  • Please log in to reply
22 replies to this topic

#1 misterE

  • Guest
  • 1,035 posts
  • -76
  • Location:Texas
  • NO

Posted 14 September 2018 - 09:49 PM


Trump is pissed off... and he's on a mission from God.

I subscribe to the "main conspiracy" of the New World Order. Which I'm sure most of the people here are aware of, and which many other conspiracies fall under or are seemingly connected to. I never believed it mattered who you voted for because the Globalists (sometimes referred to as the shadow-government or deep-state) had a tight grip over both parties (democrat and republican) and continued to push us further towards globalism each presidency.

But along comes Donald Trump, who spoke freely and openly against the Globalists and many of their agendas. I liked what he said and how he said it... but did he have a shot at becoming president? Not a chance in hell... so I didn't vote. I thought the Globalists were going to elect Hillary Clinton in order to finish their New World Order plans and America as we know it was going to be finished. But somehow Trump was elected and the policies he enacted have completely upset the establishment.

 This is all just my humble opinion and the way I view the Trump-presidency (revolution). Would love to hear some feedback...

 

Immigration: Trump is tough on immigration, many of my liberal friends think he is cold and callus, racist and xenophobic. But the Globalists want to open the boarders and allow millions of people in, in order to dilute out patriotism, American-culture and Christian-values. Take a look at what is happening to Europe right now and Germany in particular. Germany opened their boarders in 2015 and allowed millions of Muslims to enter. Their traditional German-culture is now in jeopardy and Germany could soon become an Islamic nation! Immigration is being used as a weapon to destroy nations, not physically, but culturally.

 

Trade: Trump has long been a critic of the American trade-deals and is now renegotiating them. These trade-deals were nothing more than a ploy to suck money out of America in order to build other nations and fund governments who are in allegiance to the New World Order and also to ship American jobs elsewhere forcing people to adopt their socialistic aid-programs.

 

Socialism: Trump understands that capitalism is what enabled America to become wealthy and powerful. The Globalists want to do away with capitalism and want socialism in order to get people dependent on the government and cripple American growth. Socialism will really start to destroy the American economy once all the immigrants pouring in start applying for healthcare and assistance from the government.

 

The Media: The media is the biggest critic of Trump. Long are the days of accurate unbiased reporting. The media now brainwashes people and shapes their view of reality to fit along their agenda. Trump knows this and puts their feet to the fire. The media is attacking Trump with full force and turning the American people against him, because the media are the spokesmen for The New World Order... and the media views Trump as a dire threat to their plans.

 

Guns: The Globalists don't want guns. Guns allow the citizens to revolt against tyranny if needed. The New World Order will be difficult (but not impossible) to implement with a vast array of armed citizens ready to protect America from foreign or domestic threats. With all of these mass-shootings happening, the Globalists would have easily capitalized on the opportunity to restrict our gun-rights and make it harder to obtain guns and ammo, thus allowing them to pursue globalism without overwhelming opposition.

 

The Environment: I am an environmentalist so this one is tough for me... But Trump thinks global-warming is a hoax perpetrated by the Globalists to kill American jobs and industry and to create new regulations that will harm American growth. The Paris Accord was nothing more than an opportunity by the Globalists to enact global laws and regulations that take us a step closer to world-government.

and finally...

Israel: The Globalists don't like Israel. Israel is the holy-land and it is the place where Jesus Christ will return. The Iran-deal signed by Obama was made to look good on paper (preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon), but in reality was intended to hurt Israel. Iran is the number one funder of Islamic-terrorism and Obama (under the control of the Globalists), gave Iran billions of dollars in cash to fund Isis and other terrorist attacks against Israel and Europe. The recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel was a symbol of loyalty and allegiance.

Trump has also said that his greatest ambition is to "make the deal that can't be made" which would be the peace-treaty between Israel and Palestine. Bible prophecy states that once the peace-treaty is signed, it marks the final seven years before the second coming of Christ... This deal is currently being worked on as we speak.


Edited by misterE, 14 September 2018 - 09:57 PM.

  • Ill informed x 6
  • Agree x 2
  • Needs references x 1
  • Well Written x 1
  • Unfriendly x 1
  • Disagree x 1
  • Good Point x 1

#2 Hip

  • Guest
  • 2,402 posts
  • -449
  • Location:UK

Posted 15 September 2018 - 02:02 AM

"Socialism will really start to destroy the American economy once all the immigrants pouring in start applying for healthcare and assistance from the government."

 

Socialism it seems has been carefully crafted to be a dirty word in the US. No doubt it does cost a little more to care for the weak and frail in your population, and a country can save itself a bit of money by abandoning such people. But if you compare European countries (which have much more socialism than the US), their per capita GDP is not that far behind the US per capita GDP. See list of countries by GDP per capita.

 

So socialism is not that expensive, and does not destroy economies. And the increased fairness of socialism probably has other knock-on benefits: if you look at the prison population of the US, it's absolutely enormous compared to Europe, Canada and Australia (in terms of number of prisoners per 100,000 population). See United States incarceration rate. I suggest that's probably because without the socialist safety net, life can be very harsh in the US if you hit hard times financially, and this may encourage criminal approaches to money making, just out of desperation.

 

 

 

 

 


Edited by Hip, 15 September 2018 - 02:03 AM.

  • Good Point x 5
  • Disagree x 3
  • Agree x 2
  • Needs references x 1
  • dislike x 1
  • Well Written x 1

#3 misterE

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,035 posts
  • -76
  • Location:Texas
  • NO

Posted 16 September 2018 - 03:46 AM

 

 

 

 

{1} So socialism is not that expensive, and does not destroy economies.

 

 {2} without the socialist safety net, life can be very harsh in the US if you hit hard times financially, and this may encourage criminal approaches to money making, just out of desperation.

{1} Economies can get by with socialism, but socialism destroys ambition and entrepreneurship. Why strive to be the next Bezos or Gates, when you have to turn around and distribute your hard-earned money to people who don't work?  

 

{2} Life can be harsh in the US if you don't work hard. The opposite is true as well: life can be very rewarding in the US if you work for it, hence the massive demand of immigrants from central America fleeing their socialistic countries for a taste of sweet capitalism! 


Edited by misterE, 16 September 2018 - 03:47 AM.

  • Ill informed x 7
  • Agree x 2
  • like x 2
  • Disagree x 2
  • Unfriendly x 1
  • WellResearched x 1
  • Good Point x 1

sponsored ad

  • Advert

#4 Hip

  • Guest
  • 2,402 posts
  • -449
  • Location:UK

Posted 16 September 2018 - 03:50 PM

{1} Economies can get by with socialism, but socialism destroys ambition and entrepreneurship. Why strive to be the next Bezos or Gates, when you have to turn around and distribute your hard-earned money to people who don't work?  

 

{2} Life can be harsh in the US if you don't work hard. The opposite is true as well: life can be very rewarding in the US if you work for it, hence the massive demand of immigrants from central America fleeing their socialistic countries for a taste of sweet capitalism! 

 

Certainly the relative absence of social support networks and safety nets in the US compared to Europe probably does create a society which is more focused on survival and money-making than other nations, which may encourage entrepreneurship. So no doubt that purely from the entrepreneurship point of view, the US setup may be advantageous to promoting business creation. 

 

But as mentioned, the per capita GDP of the US is not that much ahead of European countries, so it's not as if the US is far, far ahead of the European countries which have a capitalism-socialism balance. 

 

So I would not say "socialism destroys ambition and entrepreneurship". In Europe at least, socialism exists in balance with capitalism. Socialism is really there in Europe to curb the excesses and vagaries of capitalism, and to act as a safety net when things go wrong, and to support the weak, frail, or mentally or physically disabled. There is socialism, but the capitalist environment is very healthy in Europe as well. 

 

 

Sure you can say that "life can be harsh in the US if you don't work hard". And I agree that people who are healthy, energetic, intelligent and have ambitious hormones can do well in the US. And then when they are successful, they may claim that they earned their own wealth, and may credit their success to their own efforts and hard work. And they may suggest, in a self-righteous way, that that people who did not accumulate wealth are just lazy, and did not put in the effort, and so are themselves to blame for their moneyless predicament. 

 

But what I like to say to such self-righteous people is: "Really, your wealth was all due to your own efforts? Clearly your wealth arose because you are a healthy, energetic, intelligent person with ambitious hormones. But what did you actually do to earn such positive qualities? Was it something you did in a past life that endowed you with these positive traits? Or was it purely just luck that you won the genetic lottery of birth, but the next person got a bad hand, and was born with frail, low-grade health, low energy levels, not such a sharp intelligence, and lacking in ambitious hormones?"

 

Because it quite clear that the positive ambitious character qualities and good health that can create wealth are not earned, but are given as a random factor of birth. If you are born with positive ambitious qualities (through no effort of your own), then you are given a random but unfair advantage over those who are born with a more frail and weak mental and physical constitution. This is the nature of human existence: some are born strong, some frail.

 

This fact of human existence is understood by socialism and left-wing politics: socialism recognizes that human qualities of strength versus frailty are random factors of birth, and thus tries to provide some support for the weak and the frail (which also forms part of the values of most major religions). At the same time, you don't want to hold back those who are lucky enough to be born with health, energy, intelligence and ambition, and so capitalist structures are also just as important. That's why socialism and capitalism work well side by side.

 

 

 

 

Incidentally, I think part of the problem with South American economies is not so much related to socialism, but to the fact that behind the scenes, these countries are really run by a super wealthy elite: a network of super wealthy families which try to embezzle the nation's money, and pass their wealth down from one generation to the next. This is certainly the case in Brazil. These super wealthy do not care, for example, about the poor medical facilities in South America, because when they get ill, they just fly to the US and pay to see the best doctors in the world. 

 

Being super wealthy does not necessarily encourage entrepreneurship either, because if you are born with a silver spoon in your mouth, there is no pressing need to strive to make money. American entrepreneurs do not usually come from wealth, they are often poor immigrants or just average middle class people who do not have much money, and so may be hungry for it. Furthermore the super wealthy may not be interested in creating an environment and opportunities where the poor can work hard and better themselves; the the super wealthy can be like feudal lords, who live in a different world to the rest of us peasants. 

 

Thus in my view, the problem of South America is that there is an undue influence by the corrupt rich. And in fact we can argue that the problem is that South American socialism is unfortunately too weak and powerless to combat this ruling super wealth elite.

 

 

 

In fact, the same issue of the super wealthy having an undue influence in running the country has also emerged in the US in recent decades, bringing the same problems. This has resulted in less opportunities for the poor and even the middle classes to better their finances and circumstances through hard work. America has traditionally been a high risk but high reward environment; people put up with high risk because of the abundance of opportunities can can lead to high rewards. But with the super wealthy sucking up more of the nation's money and controlling more of the nation's destiny, those opportunities for reward and improvement of conditions become much less for the poor. Although robotization of the workplace which replaces human workers is also a major factor.

 

And this in part explains the rise of right-wing populism, both in the US and Europe. Right-wing populism is not like traditional right wing politics, which are often seen as the politics of the wealthy; right-wing populism is, just like socialism, concerned with the welfare of the men and women who have been left behind: right-wing populism focuses on the plight of poor, jobless blue-collar workers who currently have little or no opportunities to better their circumstances.  

 

Indeed, in Europe, many blue-collar voters who traditionally would vote for socialist politicians are now voting for right-wing populism leaders, as they feel this in their best interests. 


Edited by Hip, 16 September 2018 - 03:58 PM.

  • Agree x 3
  • Needs references x 2
  • Dangerous, Irresponsible x 1
  • Well Written x 1
  • Good Point x 1
  • Disagree x 1
  • Informative x 1

#5 Hip

  • Guest
  • 2,402 posts
  • -449
  • Location:UK

Posted 17 September 2018 - 07:12 PM

Immigration: Trump is tough on immigration, many of my liberal friends think he is cold and callus, racist and xenophobic. But the Globalists want to open the boarders and allow millions of people in, in order to dilute out patriotism, American-culture and Christian-values. Take a look at what is happening to Europe right now and Germany in particular. Germany opened their boarders in 2015 and allowed millions of Muslims to enter. Their traditional German-culture is now in jeopardy and Germany could soon become an Islamic nation! Immigration is being used as a weapon to destroy nations, not physically, but culturally.

Although I subscribe to many liberal values, the rise of right-wing populism made me realized that there some major shortcomings and lack of understandings in liberal thinking.

 

Liberals will bend over backwards to support and protect the minorities and cultural groups, whether you are gay, lesbian, black, Jewish, muslim, a single mother, physically disabled, or whatever other personal peculiarities or cultural characteristics you may have that make you different from the masses. Liberalism protects the individual and individuality, and tries to create an environment where individuals can express their own cultural characteristics without being criticized or attacked for what they are by others. 

 

This is all very commendable, but in their support for these minorities and different cultural groups, liberals seem to have forgotten one large cultural group, which is the blue-collar worker. And this is a major shortcomings in liberal thinking. All the while, as liberals defended all sorts of minorities and cultural groups, they abandoned or failed to notice the worsening plight of the blue-collar worker. As their jobs disappeared due to robotization of factories, factories moving abroad, or because immigrant labor was willing to do the same job for less, liberals failed to notice or failed to care about the plight of the indigenous blue-collar worker.

 

How could this happen? How could liberals, who pride themselves on their empathetic understanding and support of all the different minorities and different cultural groups, fail to notice or care about the blue-collar worker? This failure is in part why in the US Trump has come to power, and in Europe why we have Brexit and the rise of right-wing populist leaders. The rise right-wing populism I think is in part a direct consequence of liberals failing to care for the blue-collar worker, and for other sections of society that liberal economies have left behind.

 

The liberals' lack of rapport and support for the blue-collar worker may come from a clash of mindset. Whereas liberals are broad and encompassing in their view of people, the blue-collar worker often sees the world much more simply: he may be more comfortable with his own kind and own people, and may not enjoy or be capable of extending his thinking to encompass people very different from himself. The blue collar worker perhaps prefers a simpler, less complex reality, and a homogeneous rather than pluralistic cultural environment.

 

So you can see that as groups, liberals and blue-collar workers are probably not going to see the world in the same way. Nevertheless, liberalism has been the ruling cultural and political philosophy for the last say 40 years, so it was incumbent on liberals to reach out and accommodate the blue-collar worker, and to ensure his life and circumstances were equally catered for as any other social group. But clearly the liberals did not do this. This created discontent, and in my view helped fuel the rise of right-wing populism. Thus liberals are themselves to blame for the right-wing backlash.

 

And this right-wing populist backlash is not just due to the worsening economic factors that the blue-collar worker faces: as mentioned, the working classes are more comfortable with homogeneous rather than pluralistic cultural environment. Whereas liberals like pluralism, because the cultural variety interests and excites them. 

 

Cultural variety may just confuse the blue-collar worker section of society. They may prefer their nation to have a homogeneous set of cultural values that everyone adopts, so that they can feel part of one large family, and can have a simple and straightforward cultural identity. 

 

So this desire for a simple homogeneous cultural identity is also a factor in the rise of right-wing populism. You can see this in Poland, which is one of the European countries with a strong right-wing populist movement. In Poland over the last decade or so, salaries and living standards have significantly increased, even for the blue-collar worker. Yet in spite of these improving economic circumstances, Poland is still moving towards right-wing populism. Economics clearly cannot explain this, so it may better be interpreted as a desire for a unified national cultural identity.

 

 

So whereas President Trump and other right-wing populist leaders are often called racist, this may miss the point, as the policies of these right-wing populist leaders should also be understood in terms of a (perhaps unconscious) desire for a homogeneous national cultural identity that unifies a country into big family. And a desire to look after and consider first your own nationals (of any race or color) over those of that freshly arrived from a foreign nation or foreign culture. After all, good parents look after their own kids with much higher priority than any other children. That is what being part of a family is all about.

 

Of course there is the fear that this nationalism may all eventually end up in another global fascist uprising like we had in the 1930s, and that is legitimate concern. 

 

If the highly antagonistic and polarized divide between liberals and right-wing populists like Trump supporters is ever to be bridged, liberals will need to try to understand the right-wing populist and blue-collar worker's concerns and plight, and the right-wing populists will need to try to understand the liberal's fears of fascist uprisings.

 

  

 


Edited by Hip, 17 September 2018 - 07:20 PM.

  • Agree x 2
  • Well Written x 2
  • Enjoying the show x 1
  • unsure x 1

#6 misterE

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,035 posts
  • -76
  • Location:Texas
  • NO

Posted 20 September 2018 - 10:05 PM

I agree with you assessment of liberals taking care of minorities rather than the blue and white-collar workers, seems like the liberals cater to everyone else and the expense of those that keep the engine running: I viewed the 2016 election between Clinton and Trump as an election of Globalism or Nationalism. The Republican party left a bad stain after the disastrous Bush administration, the population corrected that by electing Obama who promised change... only to further the globalist agenda of the previous three administrations. Bush gave us Obama. Obama gave us Trump. And Trump is an outsider, who wants to bring back boarders, preserve American culture and values, preserve capitalism, and become a leading force in the world again. Everything the globalists tried to bury.

In Europe, I see a quite different scenario. Europe for the most part is much more liberal than America. That was until 2015 when Angela Merkel opened the EU to the refugees from the Middle-East and Africa. Many Europeans welcomed these immigrants with open arms only to find their beloved culture under siege, Germany getting hit the hardest. This liberal policy towards immigration in Europe, resulting in numerous terrorist-attacks and other violence, along with the rapidly changing culture has lead to the popularity of national movements like AfD and Brexit. These are desperate attempts to save their nation states.

The globalists plans for world domination, cannot persist with patriotism, national identity, boarders and cultural and religious diversity. Therefore the globalists plan to fuse it together; create internal conflict and offer a global solution.
  


Edited by misterE, 20 September 2018 - 10:07 PM.

  • Agree x 2
  • Ill informed x 1
  • Well Written x 1
  • Good Point x 1
  • Informative x 1
  • like x 1
  • Cheerful x 1

#7 pamojja

  • Guest
  • 2,922 posts
  • 730
  • Location:Austria

Posted 21 September 2018 - 10:45 AM

Therefore the globalists plan to fuse it together; create internal conflict and offer a global solution.

 

For such an agenda Trump is even the more ideal puppet then Clinton could ever have been. Seems to go even faster than planned.

 

 

This liberal policy towards immigration in Europe, resulting in numerous terrorist-attacks and other violence, along with the rapidly changing culture has lead to the popularity of national movements like AfD and Brexit.

 

Death-toll from terrorist-attacks here even now haven't reached the highs, for example the RAF together with other European organizations caused about half a century ago. Also culturally European from that time on took over about everything from America with about a 10 years delay. What changed is the perception of refugees with the Syrian debacle, right after the Irak and Afghanistan debacle. One leads to the next, and in the end all goes just as planned.


Edited by pamojja, 21 September 2018 - 10:51 AM.

  • Disagree x 2

#8 misterE

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,035 posts
  • -76
  • Location:Texas
  • NO

Posted 25 September 2018 - 03:15 PM

{1} For such an agenda Trump is even the more ideal puppet then Clinton could ever have been. Seems to go even faster than planned.

 

 

{2} Death-toll from terrorist-attacks here even now haven't reached the highs, for example the RAF together with other European organizations caused about half a century ago. Also culturally European from that time on took over about everything from America with about a 10 years delay. What changed is the perception of refugees with the Syrian debacle, right after the Irak and Afghanistan debacle. One leads to the next, and in the end all goes just as planned.

 

 

{1} I don't think so. Here in America in 2016... it was very clear who the media was wanting to win. The media said over and over that Trump couldn't win and showed all these different polls showing he didn't stand a chance. Trump is an outsider and is going against many of the globalist agendas. The Clinton's have been globalists for many decades. A huge part is the appointment of judges to the supreme court, that was a huge issues on the debate table. Clinton would have appointed these wacky liberal judges who rule against the morals and values our nation was founded on. 

{2} The death-toll probably isn't as high. Many domestic European terrorist attacks were predominant during the mid-20th century. Groups like the Provisional-IRA. But recently the death-toll (and violence) from Muslim terrorists and rioters has increased substantially. And yes... Merkel knew exactly what she was doing; she wanted to promote "multiculturalism" and dilute out traditional European values. She is a globalist, as is Macron. Macron has openly denounced nationalism and has called directly for a New World Order. Now you see why Europe is in such a mess. 


Edited by misterE, 25 September 2018 - 03:19 PM.

  • Agree x 1

#9 pamojja

  • Guest
  • 2,922 posts
  • 730
  • Location:Austria

Posted 25 September 2018 - 04:50 PM

 

Seems to go even faster than planned.

I don't think so.

 

Wait and see it unfolding. We have many example in history where 'media' said one thing, but deep government financed the other side too, to further the agenda.

 

Divide and rule.



#10 misterE

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,035 posts
  • -76
  • Location:Texas
  • NO

Posted 25 September 2018 - 11:33 PM

Just today (9-25-2018) Donald Trump spoke at the UN against the International Criminal Court, the Global Commission on International Migration and global governance. He even said "America rejects globalism". Here he is saying all this in front of the largest world-government body: the UN.


  • Agree x 1

#11 pamojja

  • Guest
  • 2,922 posts
  • 730
  • Location:Austria

Posted 26 September 2018 - 01:22 PM

Here he is saying all this in front of the largest world-government body: the UN.

 

 

Divide and rule

He is the perfect clown to deepen divisions and further the agenda.


  • Agree x 2
  • Dangerous, Irresponsible x 2
  • Disagree x 1
  • Ill informed x 1

#12 misterE

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,035 posts
  • -76
  • Location:Texas
  • NO

Posted 26 September 2018 - 03:32 PM

 

 

He is the perfect clown to deepen divisions and further the agenda.

Yeah he got some laughs, but he also got a mighty applause at the end too and the BBC is totally biased, they are the CNN of Europe. 

The division began with Obama, and even if Clinton won in 2016, the division would still have been there. The democrats here in America flaunt race, sex and inequality in everyone's face and conjure up their emotions. Obama was the perfect clown to deepen divisions (probably one of the reasons the globalists wanted him elected), unfortunately the division still stands. Here in America we have the "#walkaway" movement and millions of liberals are abandoning the democratic party, because they see that their only platform is to obstruct the republicans and divide people. Get on Youtube and search: #walkaway, you won't see that on the BBC.   


Edited by misterE, 26 September 2018 - 03:34 PM.

  • Enjoying the show x 1
  • Good Point x 1
  • Agree x 1

#13 pamojja

  • Guest
  • 2,922 posts
  • 730
  • Location:Austria

Posted 26 September 2018 - 05:30 PM

The division began with Obama, ...

 

Lets leave it at that. Since your really seem to believe Deep Government could be represented by the puppets of one party since 2009 only. And therefore couldn't have their hands in financing the Russian revolution as well at the Nazi movement, the most prominent examples of the last century. Just follow the money.


Edited by pamojja, 26 September 2018 - 05:33 PM.

  • Dangerous, Irresponsible x 2

#14 misterE

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,035 posts
  • -76
  • Location:Texas
  • NO

Posted 27 September 2018 - 01:36 AM

Since your really seem to believe Deep Government could be represented by the puppets of one party since 2009 only.

 

Oh no, that's not what I'm saying. I feel the globalists have always had themselves burrowed in American government, but they really became prominent during the past 30 years during the Bush, Clinton. Bush, Obama continuum.

The globalists have also been prevalent in European affairs too.


Edited by misterE, 27 September 2018 - 01:37 AM.

  • Good Point x 2
  • like x 1
  • Agree x 1

#15 pamojja

  • Guest
  • 2,922 posts
  • 730
  • Location:Austria

Posted 27 September 2018 - 10:08 AM

The globalists have also been prevalent in European affairs too.

 

Well, they came from Europe :dry:

 

 

..have their hands in financing the Russian revolution as well at the Nazi movement, the most prominent examples of the last century.

 



#16 platypus

  • Guest
  • 2,386 posts
  • 240
  • Location:Italy

Posted 23 June 2019 - 06:23 PM

In Europe it makes perfect sense to unite as none of the individual countries pull much weight alone but together the European countries are quite powerful. And then there's the issue that many of the current problems humanity is facing are global, so no country can solve them "alone". 


  • Agree x 2
  • Ill informed x 2
  • Dangerous, Irresponsible x 1

#17 platypus

  • Guest
  • 2,386 posts
  • 240
  • Location:Italy

Posted 23 June 2019 - 06:27 PM

Macron has openly denounced nationalism and has called directly for a New World Order. Now you see why Europe is in such a mess. 

Nationalism was tried out in Europe last century and it ended up with tens of millions of victims. So yes, we have to come up with something better. I'm not sure what the new world order will be though, the US for example seems to be a politically unstable country and an unreliable partner to boot. 


  • Disagree x 2
  • Dangerous, Irresponsible x 1
  • Agree x 1

#18 kurdishfella

  • Guest
  • 2,397 posts
  • -69
  • Location:russia
  • NO

Posted 28 July 2020 - 08:35 AM

multiculturalism only work when white people are the majority. 


  • Agree x 3
  • Good Point x 2
  • dislike x 2
  • Dangerous, Irresponsible x 1
  • Ill informed x 1

#19 misterE

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,035 posts
  • -76
  • Location:Texas
  • NO

Posted 01 August 2020 - 04:13 AM

multiculturalism only work when white people are the majority. 

 
And only White-nations experience multiculturalism. I never understood, why people migrate to America or Europe because they realize their society and way of life is superior to their country of origin, yet they want to change the host country to match the one they are fleeing. 

Multiculturalism simply doesn't work well. America was 90% White up until 1965, when we changed our immigration policy, which has reduced the White population from 90% to 60% (in 2020) and is projected to be 49% in 2040. Multiculturalism leads to racism, bigotry, oppression, division, violence, death and destruction.   

Diversity is what countries go to war over; the clash of cultures, customs and traditions. Homogeneity is what makes a nation strong, but the New World Order considers ethnically-pure nations a relic of the past. And in reality "diversity" destroys diversity. A box of crayons with each individual color is diversity... melt all the crayons together into one new color and you are no longer left with a diverse range of colors. 


Edited by misterE, 01 August 2020 - 04:25 AM.

  • Good Point x 5
  • Agree x 2
  • Ill informed x 2
  • WellResearched x 1

#20 MichaelFocus22

  • Guest
  • 331 posts
  • -16
  • Location:San Jose
  • NO

Posted 13 August 2020 - 02:58 AM

1. I find it ironic that the person who shares an alternative belief, has been negged into obliveon that seems to be a trend on this forum. all the more incentive to make a new forum with a reward system that isn't contingent on negging people.

 

 Their definitely is a new world order, it's basically common knowledge now. Even, if you think all this is nonsense,  you should at least agree their is a conspiracy for rich people to get in a room to control the word, that's basically what bilderberg is. The lingo of fake-news only became popular after trump won, because the leftist movement failed to dissuade the public to trust classical status-quo beliefs. Either way, the vote is meaningless, I don't see any change quantifiably coming from trump nor did I expect much but I'll take him over biden.

 

 

Furthermore, it's possible that the new-world order may be inevitable because the rate of artificial intellignece/ technoloogical advancement is speeding up much quicker than I ever anticipated. I suspect 1984 is much closer than I ever realized possible, survelliance, mass censorship, cancel culture and politically double think ideology is increasingly becoming the norm in this society. Imagine, once artificial intelligence arrives, how much power the government will have over society. COVID-19 is one of the greatest brainwash tactics in history, but that's "disinformation". I suspect the globalists are winning.


Edited by MichaelFocus22, 13 August 2020 - 03:03 AM.

  • Agree x 4
  • Ill informed x 1

#21 Lazarus Long

  • Life Member, Guardian
  • 8,116 posts
  • 242
  • Location:Northern, Western Hemisphere of Earth, Usually of late, New York

Posted 30 December 2020 - 12:59 AM

It doesn't require conspiracy for like minded people with resources to act in concert with one another. Common interests have always been a more powerful means of control than secret planning. One tenth of one percent of humanity holds more wealth than twenty five percent of the entire human race. The top forty billionaires are more wealthy than the poorest forty nations combined.

Is the opposite of socialism, serfdom?

It certainly isn't capitalism.

Edited by Lazarus Long, 30 December 2020 - 01:03 AM.

  • Good Point x 1

#22 TheFountain

  • Guest
  • 5,367 posts
  • 259

Posted 09 December 2021 - 07:12 AM

 
And only White-nations experience multiculturalism. I never understood, why people migrate to America or Europe because they realize their society and way of life is superior to their country of origin, yet they want to change the host country to match the one they are fleeing. 

Multiculturalism simply doesn't work well. America was 90% White up until 1965, when we changed our immigration policy, which has reduced the White population from 90% to 60% (in 2020) and is projected to be 49% in 2040. Multiculturalism leads to racism, bigotry, oppression, division, violence, death and destruction.   

Diversity is what countries go to war over; the clash of cultures, customs and traditions. Homogeneity is what makes a nation strong, but the New World Order considers ethnically-pure nations a relic of the past. And in reality "diversity" destroys diversity. A box of crayons with each individual color is diversity... melt all the crayons together into one new color and you are no longer left with a diverse range of colors. 

 

This here is one of the BEST things Trump ever said. 

 

 

And by the way, this is not the only question we should ask China. We should also ask them why Chinese citizens flock to America more than any other civilized nation? We should also ask china why they want to abolish the freedoms of Taiwan and Hong Kong, who as we know have been heavily influenced by the western world and the freedom and liberty to create an entrepreneurial society that doesn't rely on the big daddy government telling every person what to do and when.  

 

The problem is that all eyes are on the USA when they should be on China and the human rights atrocities and threats they continue to enact.



#23 misterE

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,035 posts
  • -76
  • Location:Texas
  • NO

Posted 15 January 2022 - 02:29 AM

 

 

The problem is that all eyes are on the USA when they should be on China and the human rights atrocities and threats they continue to enact.


I agree. The New World Order seems to be (or wanting to) replacing the USA with China as the global economic engine. I believe like tens of millions of others, that the NWO created and released this virus purposely... one of the reasons being to rig the election and force Trump out of power. Trump thought he could take them on, but they proved to be far too powerful and created a chaotic environment that lead to his removal from power.  


  • Agree x 2
  • dislike x 1





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: immigration, trade, socialism, media, israel, globalism, america, donald trump, conspiracy, new world order

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users