(This article is one in a series entitled “Killing The Nation State: How COVID-19 Was Used to End the Sovereignty of America”, uncovering the purpose and ultimate objectives of globalism.)
Hans Morgenthau was world-renowned in the 20th century for his writings and views on international relations and politics. His work could be found in many of the most popular publications in his prime. During his time as a consultant for the U.S. State Department, Morgenthau shared what his geopolitical view was regarding the possibility of world conquest:
“Today no technological obstacle stands in the way of a world-wide empire…modern technology makes it possible to extend the control of mind and action to every corner of the globe regardless of the geography and season“
Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace (Morgenthau, 1948)
He went on to say that through the technological advancement and increasingly effective development of vital infrastructure (such as communications, transportation, and weaponry) that “they make it technically possible to keep the world in that conquered state.“
Aldous Huxley was an English philosopher and author of many great works, including my personal favorite, A Brave New World. Huxley expressed concern for a scenario in which many a plot point from his infamous dystopian novel could become reality.
In a 1958 interview with Mike Wallace, Huxley shared many of these concerns. Huxley believed in the idea of personal freedoms and decentralized government. But he noticed a pattern with government advancements in both organization and technology that “seems to be pushing very strongly towards a totalitarian regime. But, the most interesting part of this future regime he envisioned was that it may not be simply one country, or one dictator, but a global unity of government that would come to power through another vehicle: controlling the mind of citizens through advancements in technology, as well as a means to communicate (media) around the globe.
“I mean, what I feel strongly about,” Huxley said to Wallace, “is that we mustn’t be caught by surprise by our own advancing technology. This happened again and again in history with technology’s advance and this changes social condition, and suddenly people find themselves in a situation which they did not foresee and doing all sorts of things they really didn’t want to do.”
When asked about the influence of television on the masses, Huxley replied, “…it’s being used too much to distract everybody all the time. But, I mean, imagine the situation in all communist countries where the television, where it exists, is always saying the same things the whole time; it’s always driving along. It’s not creating a wide front of distraction, it’s creating a one-pointed, er…drumming in of a single idea all the time. It’s obviously an immensely powerful instrument.”
What Huxley described is precisely what we are witnessing today. A mass media conglomerate, which reportedly is six corporations controlling the narrative of up to 90% of all mainstream news in America. He believed if their thoughts and purpose could be controlled and aligned to fit the agenda of these hidden entities, there was a chance that they could create a centralized government that could potentially do what a dictator (like Stalin or Hitler, for example) could accomplish; but with much greater effectiveness and efficiency.
Wallace then challenged Huxley about why individual freedom and decentralizing government was so important…
“Many have been talking about the importance of decentralization in order to give back to the voter a sense of direct power. The voter in an enormous electorate field is quite impotent, and his vote seems to count for nothing. ”
Huxley goes on to share about freedom and the limiting of power…
“…all democracies are based on the proposition that power is very dangerous and that it is extremely important not to let any one man or any one small group have too much power for too long a time. After all, what are the British and American Constitution except devices for limiting power, and all these devices are extremely efficient instruments for the imposition of power by small groups over large masses.”
What Huxley described over half a century ago are the primary concerns for those of us that value our individual liberty that has been given by God, and the threat from any form of government that will attempt to remove it.
What we are witnessing today is a “drumming” of ideas that must be followed or adhered to, through a mainstream media shouting a narrative in unison that demands you do it or be ostracized, or be in violation of some made up ethic, along with frightening us of the dangers of attempting to “go against the flow”.
This is a form of conquest that is taking shape in America. It is being advanced by nefarious individuals, private organizations working with government and funded by them or individual “philanthropists“, using the global organization originally put in place under the United Nations umbrella, to advance the causes of their agenda and the citizens that have willingly chosen this path in light of surrendering their individual freedoms. The conquest is marching on in many forms as we speak. But in order to stop it, we must know the enemy hiding in the shadows in which we are fighting. This and many other relevant issues will be revealed as citizens (like myself) choose the path of standing up and defending our own personal liberties, which is laid out succinctly in The Bill of Rights.
(Chris Gaines is an author and editor for patriotgaines.com)
Photo sources: Patriots’ Soapbox, Politico, Breitbart, video courtesy of Harry Ransom Center.
3 thoughts on “World Conquest: The Hidden Danger of Globalization”
Excellent article. This dovetails nicely with Tucker Carlson’s recent video about Google’s unstoppable reign of power. Once freedom is lost it’s nearly impossible to get it back.
LikeLiked by 1 person
You’re last statement is so true. We’ve spent 250 years working day and night to attain and maintain our liberties only to watch them get washed away right before eyes. I, for one, will not stand idly by.