I’ve read a great deal on this, and it just does not fly in the sense proponents wish to believe and argue.
There are very powerful elites. Sometimes they work together. Sometimes they are at each other’s throats. Some elements do want to take things in the direction of some form of global government. Other elements are dead set against it – elements whose power is rooted in a national power base. The interplay between these two is ongoing. The reality is that the “New World Order”, or “One World Government” is essentially an inversion of the concept of US global hegemony, which was explicitly spelled out as the US policy aim after the collapse of the Soviet Union. It is US-based, global finance/mulitnational corporations backed explicity by the Pentagon that has driven the entire agenda. The whole “global conspiracy” concept locates the problem in some unseen “up there” of power. Well, it’s not “up there”, it’s down here, right in front of our eyes.
And it’s being exercised right now in the form of what amounts to economic war – the US, faced with a devastating financial crisis, has made a conscious decision to extract wealth from the rest of the world to prop it up. Major elements of the “global elite” are being squeezed like sponges, and they in turn are squeezing their populations – it is not a friendly exercise among like-minded palsy-walsies. The only developed countries on board for this are the UK and Canada (which is effectively an appendage of the US). Even Australia is now tied to Chinese “success” far more than the “West”.
This is about the Anglo-American economic, political and military model since the end of WWII, and it’s severe problems rooted fundamentally in unsustainablility absent an ever-increasing element of economic or military force.
As for some “plan” to slaughter half the world’s population, that’s ridiculous. It’s not planned – but it very much a likely outcome of the policy that flows from an Empire’s desperate struggle to hold onto it’s power.
It serves nobody to relocate responsiblity away from where it’s rooted. It only makes it that much more difficult to actually change things in the one place where it matters most, and that is in the US, where it is entirely valid to make all the arguments required to demand that US/WS policy now be abandoned because it is also crushing the majority of Americans as well (it was easy to ignore the effects everywhere else so long as the US population appeared to be on an open-ended increase in wealth, life-styles, etc.).
This is an epochal turning point. The US is still by far the most powerful economy and militarily capable country on the planet. But it can no longer dicatate the outcome without courting major, serious oppostion from other centers of power. As stated, every step down this road is one increasingly backed by sheer force. We already know how well that’s worked vis a vis the entire Muslim world, which is fundamentally very, very weak. To attempt to maintain preponderant power against a line-up that includes China, Russia to begin with, and now adding Japan and Europe is insane – unless a “win” is so relative in its meaning as to be absurd.
We’ve been this route once before – and the result was fascism and catastrophe. No secret “elite” was responsible for that, all claims to the contrary being silly at best – a very large number of “elite” players were dead in that one – hard to argue that was their “plan”.
Keep it to what can be demonstrably shown – there’s no master plan or blueprint. Only very powerful interests who will brutally do whatever it takes to maintain or enhance their position based on what they believe are the exigencies of the moment. Right now, the most powerful of those still reside in the US – but the proposition now has become one of whether that power is sufficient to force an outcome that keeps that position. I would not bet a nickel that it is – unless, as stated, a “win” is something only a Dr. Strangelove mind (no need for nuclear war) would claim as such.
Keep it front and center who it is that’s driving this.