Connect with us

Conspiracy Theories

The New World Order: Does It All Just Boil Down To A Battle For Your Soul?

Brandon Smith

From its very inception, the Leninist/Marxist ideology of the Soviet Union made it a central priority to dispel and subjugate religious and spiritual expression. The state was “god.” No other god could be allowed to flourish, for if the people were given license and freedom of belief in something beyond themselves and beyond the establishment, they would retain a sense of rebellion. The collectivist philosophy requires the utter destruction of all competitors; otherwise, it can never truly prevail.

Atheism became the cult of choice among the communists, for in an atheist world there is nothing beyond the veil. There is no greater goal and no inherent self. There is no true individualism, only self interest (not the same thing), the trappings of environmental circumstances, and the constant substantiation of the greater good. By extension, there is no inborn moral compass or conscience, only the social fashions and mores of the moment. In such a world, tyrants reign supreme because atheism allows relativism to flourish; and any crime, no matter how heinous, can be rationalized. Beyond this, if you know and study the real history of the rise of communism, you know through great researchers like Antony Sutton that the very fabric of the system would never have existed without the monetary and military aid of international financiers (i.e. the NWO).

The atheist position uses the same arguments I have just made as a reason to remove religion and spirituality from our cultural influences. And in some respects, atheists are right. Religion is a tool that can be exploited to manipulate the masses. Any system of belief that is faith-based can be misinterpreted and abused in order to lure unwitting dupes and mindless followers into the fray of an engineered disaster. Atheists commonly argue that it is the encumbering nature of faith that causes mankind to destroy itself in the name of zealotry and self-righteous ignorance.

The difference, however, is that religious zealots are still required by the confines of their dogma to at least appear as though they follow a moral code. Therefore, they can be exposed as violators of this code and weakened over time. The atheist/collectivist system, though, thrives on the concept that there is no such thing as a moral code and that one is vindicated and heroic if he takes extreme action to prove that traditional morality is a vice, rather than a virtue. Atheists in positions of power often make no attempt to affirm their actions; rather, they demand that society abandon all conscience and sense of natural law. They do not ask for forgiveness; they order you to apologize for your moral compass. Are some atheists good and honorable people? Surely. The point, however, remains; atheism is the new flavor of the era, the increasingly predominant gravitational center of modern culture, the philosophical soil in which the NWO has chosen to grow its globalist experiment.

What atheists don’t seem to grasp is that atheism is itself based on an act of faith: faith in the idea that there is nothing beyond our perceptions of existence. They have no more factual knowledge of what lay at the center of life than any of the religious acolytes they so fondly attack, yet their own hypocrisy is apparently lost on them.

I would not pretend to deny that religion has the ability to create a volatile atmosphere edging toward genocidal tendency, but so does any belief system that assumes it is the paramount of knowledge denying all others. The intellectual intolerance of the socialist atheism of the 20th century spawned a death machine that claimed the lives of millions of people. So, clearly, atheists should be more concerned with the violent tendencies of their own ilk rather than the religious “fiends” they seem so obsessed with. Of course, this is a history modern atheists would rather ignore or rewrite.

I have always been concerned with the dilemma of the collectivist ideology, but even more so in recent months, as our world creeps closer toward global crisis. Crisis always provides circumstance and cover for dangerous philosophical totalitarianism.

Not long ago I came across the column “Some Atheists And Transhumanists Are Asking: Should It Be Illegal To Indoctrinate Kids With Religion?” on Huffington Post. It was written by Zoltan Istvan, a transhumanist and self-proclaimed “visionary and philosopher.”

Firstly, I have a hard time taking anything published by the Huffington Post seriously. Secondly, I have a hard time taking anyone using the name “Zoltan” seriously. Thirdly, I have a hard time taking anyone who labels himself a “visionary” seriously. That said, it is important to study the propaganda of the other side carefully. You never know what kinds of truths you might come across amid all the lies.

The article does not really define what it considers “indoctrination”, but I would assume transhumanists and atheists would argue that anything not scientifically proven could become indoctrination. Interestingly, Istvan starts his tirade against the handing down of religious beliefs by admitting that science has added very little to our overall knowledge of the universe. After all, human beings experience only a narrow spectrum of the world around us, and there is indeed much we do not know. For some reason, it does not dawn on atheists that perhaps our limited scientific observations of the universe do not necessarily outweigh or deny the existence of an intelligent design.

In order to distract from their fundamental lack of knowledge, modern collectivist governments and movements have always made the promise of technological utopia and endless abundance in order to sway the populace into supporting establishment power. We will all work far less, or we will never have to work at all. Shelter, food, health and wealth will be provided for us. Our free time will be spent studying the nature of the cosmos and perpetuating the cult of academia, protected by a benevolent technocratic governing body straight out of an episode of “Star Trek.”

Not surprisingly, John Maynard Keynes himself predicted in 1930 that technological advancement and economic abundance would result in a three-hour workday and infinite time to amuse oneself by the year 2030 in his essay “The Economic Possibilities For Our Grandchildren.”

This was the same essay in which Keynes referred to the financial concerns of many at the onset of the Great Depression as “misinterpretations” and “pessimism.”

Transhumanism, a mainstay of global elitism and the New World Order, also uses fantastical images of scientifically created contentment to sell itself to starry-eyed rubes packed into the circus tent of the technocratic carnival. The very essence of the movement is the argument that one day ALL knowledge of the universe will be obtained by mankind and that through this knowledge, we (a select few anyway) will obtain godhood.

Again, as in the Huffington Post column, the claim is that science knows all or will eventually know all and that whatever has not been dissected and observed by science like the conceptions of religion must, therefore, be dubious myth.

Ironically, there is far more scientific evidence of God and spiritual life than there is evidence against. So by the very standards many atheists hold dear, it is they who are peddling indoctrination rather than truth.

In the world of mathematics, the good friend of Albert Einstein, Kurt Godel, is famous (but not as famous as he should be) for writing what would be called the “incompleteness proof.” In mathematics, a proof is a statement that is ALWAYS true and can always be proven true. Godel’s proof shook the very foundations of the mathematical world, because it outlined the fact that all mathematical knowledge is limited by numerical paradox, and that humanity will never be able to define all things through mathematical means.

Global elites such as Bertrand Russell had spent years of effort attempting to prove that mathematics was the unbridled code of the universe and that the universe could be understood in its entirety through the use of numbers. Godel shattered this delusion with his incompleteness proof, establishing once and for all that math is limited, not infinite. The existence of mathematical paradox along with an undefinable “infinity” lends credence to the religious view that there are indeed some things man will never know, but at least he has the ability to prove that he can never know them.

In the world of quantum physics, the work of Werner Heisenberg, along with that of many other scientists, has shown that the very mechanics of the world around us are not at all what they seem and that traditional physics is only a hollow shell of knowledge limited by our ability to observe.

The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle dictates that the observer of a particular physical state always affects the object being observed, making it impossible to know all the data necessary at one time to predict the future of that object. If a person hoped to become a god, he would certainly need to be able to tell the future; and to tell the future, one would need the ability to observe and record every aspect of every particle interacting in the environment around him. Any unknown quantity could change the outcome of any particular event. Heisenberg found that particles act very differently depending on how they are observed. In some experiments, he even discovered that individual particles appeared to be in two places at the same time, thus making them wholly unpredictable.

This behavior in the building blocks of matter is confounding to many in the realm of physics. Add to it the fact that scientists remain fixed on an endless and apparently futile quest to find the base particle that makes up the universe, and once again we find that the dreams of the transhumanist atheists to attain godhood fall terribly short. In addition, the apparently “intelligent” behavior of inanimate particles under observation leads one to question whether the universe is really just a chaotic mess of matter, or a dynamic living machine.

In the realm of psychology, Carl Gustav Jung discovered through decades of research the existence of inborn psychological contents. That is to say, from the moment of our birth, human beings contain complex elements of knowledge and identity, meaning we are NOT merely products of our particular environments. Jung called these pieces of inherent information “archetypes.”

The most important aspect of archetypes for our discussion is the existence of opposing views, or “dualities.” The concepts of good and evil, the concepts of conscience as well as guilt and regret, are not necessarily taught to us. Rather, we are born with such elements already within us. The fact that we are born with an at least unconscious understanding of good versus evil means we have the potential power of choice, a power beyond the realm of environment and beyond the reach of would-be tyrants and collectivists. If this does not constitute scientific evidence of a human “soul,” then I do not know what does. The fact of archetypes is undeniable. The question is: Since they do not come from environment, where do they come from?

Istvan’s column doesn’t mention or regard any of the scientific evidence for the existence of an intelligent design. He merely argues that science is the only definable known quantity, and only the known quantity is an acceptable form of belief. But what if the known quantity is so limited as to make a society dangerously ignorant?

The article goes on to promote (somewhat shamelessly) the author’s book, in which the hero, a transhumanist atheist, is given the power to reshape society into any form he wishes. The hero questions whether he should remove religion from the picture entirely, for if religion were erased, wouldn’t the world finally be at peace? Istvan himself questions whether religious expression should be banned in the case of children, so that they are given the chance to “choose” what they wish to believe later in life. This, of course, disregards the fact that children are already born with the prospect of choice, which is why many children who grow up Christian do not practice it later in life, and why many children from atheist homes end up joining religious movements. The idea that all children are permanently molded or damaged by their parent’s unchecked beliefs is complete nonsense.

What the author reveals in his work of fiction is the greater threat of the atheist and transhumanist ideology — namely, the arrogant assumption that they know what is best for the world and the public based on their scientific observations, which are limited and often misinterpreted. This problem extends into the oligarchy of globalists, who adore the theories expressed in Plato’s “The Republic,” in which an elite cadre of “philosopher kings,” men who have achieved a heightened level of academic knowledge, are exalted as the most qualified leaders. However, leadership requires more than knowledge, even if that knowledge is profound. Leadership also requires compassion and informed consent, two things for which the elites have no regard.

The New World Order, an ideal often touted by globalists and defined by their own rhetoric as a scientific dictatorship in which collectivism is valued and individualism is criminalized, seems to me to be — in its ultimate form and intention — a battle for the human soul. They try to convince us that there is no such thing, that there is no inborn conscience, that there is a rationale for every action, that spiritualism is a frivolous and terroristic pursuit, and that cold logic and science, as defined by them, are the paths to prosperity and peace. They also seek to tempt the masses with imaginary stories of attainable godhood and artificial Eden, promises on which they can never deliver. Anyone can point a gun at you and demand your fealty, but this is not what the elites want. Rather, they want you to voluntarily resign yourself over to the hive mind and sacrifice your conscience in the process. While one might argue over what it is they “truly” believe at the core of their cult, it is undeniable that collectivism, moral relativism, and atheism are their favorite promotional weapons.

The reactionary responses to my criticisms of the elitist philosophy will likely involve endless renunciations of crimes committed in the name of religious fervor. I agree; religion has always been exploited, usually by the elites themselves, to enslave as well as to murder. Even today, I hear some so-called Christians argue in favor of genocide using half-baked interpretations of biblical reference. But at bottom, I much prefer a world in which religious expression is free, rather than abolished in the name of an overarching zealotry in the form of a stunted mathematical morality. I prefer a world where the spiritual side of existence is allowed to add to observational awareness. Logic alone is not wisdom, after all. Wisdom is the combination of reason, intuition and experience.

I refuse to live under any form of theocracy, whether religious or scientific. The idea that we must choose between one or the other is a farce — a controlled debate. The individual soul (or whatever you want to call it) is the only thing that matters. It is important that we never forget that when we fight against the NWO, we are not just fighting for liberty; we are also fighting for something profoundly and inherently spiritual. Though we might not be able to define it, we can feel it. And that is enough.

Comments

Conspiracy Theories

Exploring a strange satellite: Iron arguments of Soviet scientists about the purpose of the moon

At the end of last year, in Indianapolis, astronomers filmed the moon and were surprised to find that an object of unknown origin hovered near the Earth’s satellite. There is no explanation for this phenomenon, from the point of view of official science, like many others, in the long series of lunar phenomena that astronomers observe. 

Recently, Dr. Robert Jastrow, the first president of the NASA commission, even called the moon the Rosetta stone of the planet, meaning that it is on the moon or inside the moon that the answer to the mystery of the origin of life on earth is possible.

Iron arguments of Soviet scientists about the purpose of the moon

“As soon as people got the first telescopes, back in the 18th century, already at that time on the Moon, some kind of activity was constantly observed, and it is clear that it was inhuman, which flies by against the background of the moon. “

Vladimir Kukolnikov (researcher)
Space, Moon
Space, Moon

A lot of unexplained phenomena associated with the Moon have accumulated in recent years. Recently, against the background of the Moon, incomprehensible lights were again seen, this time they were green. Astronomers all over the world are lost in conjecture, they are trying to analyze incomprehensible flares and catch some system, but they have not found a rational explanation. 

One thing is clear, on the celestial body closest to the Earth, there is a certain technical device for generating intense light. Where it is located is difficult to say. These can be both stationary beacons and those installed on mobile machines or aircraft. The fact is that scientists constantly record moving lights. What all this means is not yet clear. Ufologists consider this to be direct evidence of the existence of extraterrestrial intelligence there. 

Periodic flares and flickering lights on the moon it is impossible not to notice anymore. The fact is there, but no one can explain it. The main version is that these lights are of technogenic origin. However, some researchers put forward hypotheses fighting to fall. They believe that it could be the natural, phosphorescent light of the lunar fauna, a kind of giant moon fireflies.

Flashes of light on the moon
Flashes of light on the moon

“Apart from that, there is information, of course unverified and unreliable about the selenites, that is, the inhabitants of the moon. It states that they, in the form of some kind of crustacean, crawled out of their shelters.”

Pavel Sitnikov (researcher)
Luminous Lunar Plankton))
Luminous Lunar Plankton

Professor Hakan Kajal, of the Julius Maximilian University in Würzburg, decided to try to sort out this problem. To collect information, he used a private observatory in Spain. Two telescopes with an automatic flash fixation system will be used. 

In addition, this system is connected to an artificial intelligence system that will analyze all the unusual phenomena on the moon. And maybe, as the researchers believe, they will be able to grasp elements of logic in them, or even read a certain message that the inhabitants of the Moon are likely sending to recipients unknown to us.

Iron arguments of Soviet scientists about the purpose of the moon

An anomalously accurately selected stationary circular orbit, its height, course, speed, all this could not have developed in the course of random circumstances. She’s too perfect, and mathematically accurate. Besides, the Moon is extremely unlike all other satellites. In addition, some scientists believe that the moon is much older than Earth. 

Meanwhile, take a look at the photo below, from the University of Arizona’s space research site. An official scientific source publishes a photo of an apparently artificial structure on the moon. Call it a crater, it just does make sense. 

This is an absolutely regular hexagon, similar in appearance to the building of the Lunar Base. Everything is clearly planned, the outer walls, the central elevation, and the ring system of unknown purpose. Researchers are confident that this is an exit or entrance into the moon.

Unidentified Lunar Object

“The fact is that the meeting with representatives of other worlds took place long ago. If there were no meetings with representatives of alien worlds, we would not have been in the form in which we are, do you understand ?! The moon would not have been in orbit, as it is today, all the time one side is turned to the Earth. This is done on purpose. On the other side, there are bases, and not only on the other side. “

Anton Anfalov (candidate of economic sciences, researcher)

Artificial objects are clearly visible in this photograph, taken by the Soviet automatic station Luna-13. The remains of some kind of machine, or mining mechanism. Moreover, there are two of them in one picture. 

On the left side of the frame, these are paired discs, similar to rollers from a lunar rover, and on the right, these are the same discs mounted on one axis. Both objects cast shadows, and appear as alien, man-made objects on the lifeless surface of the Earth’s satellite. 

Did they accidentally hit the shot, or were Soviet scientists looking for something purposefully? Recently, more and more scientists are inclined to the hypothesis that the Moon is an artificial satellite or even a ship in the form of a planetoid, which was specially placed at a specific point in space.

Iron arguments of Soviet scientists about the purpose of the moon

“It was put into Earth’s orbit on purpose, with one side on purpose, all cycles were synchronized, and it is used as a base for observations. It is not completely hollow, there are separate voids, cavities, very large cavities that are used.”

Anton Anfalov (candidate of economic sciences, researcher)
Iron arguments of Soviet scientists about the purpose of the moon

Few people know that this theory, back in the sixties, was put forward by Soviet scientists Mikhail Vasin and Alexander Shcherbakov from the USSR Academy of Sciences. 

This means only one thing, if these academics risked their reputation so much for the sake of scientific truth, then they had iron arguments.

Continue Reading

Conspiracy Theories

TR-3B’s are absolutely real but who ‘owns’ them?

In early October, on many UFO channels, two very unusual UFO videos were discussed. Their unusualness is that, in contrast to many similar clips, their reliability is beyond doubt and the “discs” can be seen very well there – you can even see some details. 

The first video was filmed from the International Space Station. For readers who, due to the remoteness from the city, have too expensive traffic, we present an enlarged program image of the “plate”

Well, this is the video itself:

A lot of incomprehensible video material comes from the ISS, but most often there are either just luminous objects in the frame, or some vague shadows, which skeptics later call pieces of foil, but here it is definitely not foil, and in general terms you can understand how these “saucer plates” look. 

The second very unusual video was filmed the day before over the state of New York:

Direct link to the original mufon.

This is not a computer graphics, nor a secret drone. This is a TR-3B, which, as we can see, exists and can be viewed in detail. In the center there is some kind of basic, apparently, an engine, three engines (nozzles?) in the corners and they obviously work on some other principle – their color is different.

What are the three small lights along one of the edges of the triangle is not clear. Either it is some kind of device for taxiing the apparatus, or signal lights. And this thing bears little resemblance to some kind of “extraterrestrial device”, which causes more and more concern among people. Why? 

If the Pentagon has had such aircrafts for a long time (triangles have been observed in the sky for at least 30 years), then why all this circus with F-35 and other airplanes? To keep people busy in their production and rip off money from buyers? Or are the squadrons with these strange vehicles not under the control of the Pentagon? But who do they obey then? 

Conspiracy theorists are now offering two main explanations for the situation – good and bad.

A good explanation suggests that Trump and his Space Forces are behind these secret ‘ashtrays’. That is, either these TR-3Bs report directly to him, or Trump was promoted to the White House by the people who are behind the development of these devices. And now, visually flying over some cities of the United States, some secret military from Area-51 made it clear to the Deep State who is in charge in America and in the world in general:

 The second possible explanation for the flashes of TR-3B is already very pessimistic and suggests that the military behind these technologies is precisely the same Deep State. In this case, the collapse of America is a foregone conclusion and no Trump can do anything there. 

In any outcome of the elections, first unrest will begin in America, then China, the UN and other “peacekeepers” will climb there to restore order, during which the Chinese MiG-21s will bring down F-35 packs, since an invisible UFO will fly in front of them and do all the work … And the whole world will be surprised by the “great Chinese power”. 

Then China will begin to establish its own order, spreading hegemony throughout the world. Someone will fall under it voluntarily, but someone will not agree with such a new order and a hefty war will begin that will cover the entire planet. The last battle will obviously be somewhere in the Syrian desert, where the Chinese, according to prophecies, will bring 200 million people. And at that moment, TR-3B will appear from the clouds and burn all the army – both from one side and the other.

Further landing ramps will fall, some cyborgs or genomutants will be dumped from the miracle-ships in formation and will report that so they say and so – from now on we will all live without wars, according to new rules, in a new global and friendly world. This will be followed by a general command to chip. 

We do not know which of the options is correct. We hope for the first, but the second is also not excluded. Everything will become more or less clear only after the US elections…   

Continue Reading

Conspiracy Theories

Chatham House – The Open Conspiracy Organization Emerged 100 Years Ago

HG Wells  in “The Open Conspiracy. Blue Prints for a World Revolution”(1928) wrote that in the twentieth century the world entered a dangerous phase of development, which could end in catastrophe and even destruction of mankind. The only way to prevent a catastrophe, Wells instructed, is the elimination of sovereign states and the creation of a One World Government, headed by a small group of people – representatives of the intellectual elite and big business.

The Open Conspiracy: Blue Prints for a World Revolution

The idea of ​​world domination has been nurtured for centuries by various secret societies (Templars, Freemasons, Illuminati). However, their plans and activities were hidden from the eyes of the authorities and the people. In the twentieth century, there was an argument to open these plans. And it was necessary to hurry, because scientific and technological progress was accelerating, remaining uncontrollable. The arms race continued and accelerated in exactly the same way.

At the 1919 Paris Peace Conference, these issues were discussed openly. It was decided to create the League of Nations, through which the British and Americans expected to begin building a new world order. True, there were disagreements between the ruling circles of the United States and Great Britain. London believed that the ideal basis for a united world was the British Empire, over which“the sun never sets.” In Washington, it was believed that America became the No. 1 power after the First World War and that it was she who should lead the movement towards a new world order.

Colonel House
Colonel House

However, both in the USA and Great Britain there were politicians who considered these imperial ambitions to be “prejudices of nationalism”, considering themselves a single elite of the highest Anglo-Saxon race. Such was Edward Mandel House  (1858-1938) – diplomat, adviser to President  Woodrow Wilson  (Colonel House). Lord Alfred Milner  (1854-1925), one of the key figures in the cabinet of David Lloyd George, was also a consistent supporter of Anglo-Saxon mondialism.

Lord Alfred Milner
Lord Alfred Milner

Colonel House was very upset when, while at a conference in Paris, he learned that Washington had rejected US participation in the League of Nations, the provisions of which were laid down in the Versailles Peace Treaty. He very much hoped that the League of Nations would become an instrument for the creation of a United State. After that, in the same place, in Paris, Colonel House met with British partners. They agreed that two organizations would be created in the United States and Great Britain, closely interacting and implementing the Anglo-Saxon project of building a new world order.

The first of these organizations was established a hundred years ago, in the summer of 1920. It was the  British Institute of International Affairs (BIIA) , renamed toThe Royal Institute of International Affairs (RIIA)  in 1926  and still exists under that name. The Institute is also known as Chatham House, which is the name of the building in which it is located (next to Westminster Palace in central London). In 1961, the  RIIA  changed location, but the Chatham House name remained.

The preparatory work for the establishment of the  RIIA  was carried out by  Lionel Curtis , Lord Milner’s secretary. The status of the institute is a non-governmental non-profit organization that exists at the expense of voluntary donations. The first donation of £ 2,000 was made by Thomas Lamont  of J.P. Morgan Bank. John D. Rockefeller  has contributed  £ 8,000 annually to the RIIA since 1932. Later, the  RIIA  began to regularly receive large regular donations from American charitable foundations (the Rockefeller, Carnegie, and others).

The first head of the institute was  Robert Cecil  (1864-1958) – British lawyer, parliamentary, public and statesman, active employee and ideologist of the League of Nations, winner of the 1937 Nobel Peace Prize (for services to the League of Nations). Lionel Curtis was promoted to RIIA Honorary Secretary. The leadership of the institute also included former Foreign Minister  Edward Gray , former Prime Minister  Arthur Balfour , Lord Lothian, renowned English economist  John Maynard KeynesAlfred Zimmerman  (Oxford professor, author of The League of Nations and the Rule of Law). Zimmermann had a capable student, Arnold Toynbee (1889-1975). On Zimmerman’s recommendation, Toynbee became the institute’s first paid employee. Toynbee was later appointed director of the institute. At Chatham House,  Toynbee played the leading role for three decades (1925-1955). He directed scientific research and was at the same time a high-ranking officer of the British  MI6  (intelligence) service. Much of the RIIA research was done on behalf of MI6 .

Arnold Toynbee
Arnold Toynbee

RIIA did not arise out of nowhere. It became a superstructure over the rather secret organization “Round Table”. According to historians, this society arose as a secret in 1891 in South Africa at the initiative of Cecil John Rhodes (1853-1902), a famous figure of British imperialism, who linked his life with the British colonial expansion in South Africa. Rhodes, a gold and diamond miner in South Africa, was associated with the Rothschilds. In 1910, the Rothschilds established the Round Table in London; the main public figure for the Round Table was Lord Alfred Milner. During the Lord’s lifetime, the Round Table was often called the Milner Group. Many historians believe that at the beginning of the 20th century the composition of the Round Table and the composition of the Committee of 300 (the world elite).

As Nicholas Hagger notes  in The Syndicate, the history of the creation of a secret world government and the methods of its influence on world politics and economy ”, the activities of the Round Table had two contours – external (open activity) and internal (secret activity). The task of the Round Table, writes the famous American historian  Carroll Quigley (1910-1977) in the book Tragedy and Hope, was “no less than the creation of a world system of financial control, concentrated in private hands and capable of influencing the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system will be completely feudally governed by the central banks of the world, acting in accordance with secret agreements concluded at frequent personal meetings and conferences. Quigley was very fond of the Round Table, being the official historian of this society.

The Round Table set out the task of creating a world government governed by international bankers. Many researchers of the Round Table activities believe that the program of this organization as a whole coincides with the program of the Illuminati Order in the 18th century. The successors of the Illuminati, members of the Round Table, viewed England as an Atlantic force, not a European one, and counted on the creation of a federation of English-speaking countries. Milner has established Roundtable Groups in South Africa, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, India and CIF. They were all run from England. They included the most famous politicians of the British government, and they were all devoted to the idea of ​​world government. The Roundtable has always wanted to transform the British Empire into a federal system that would eventually include both the United Kingdom and the United States.

The RIIA  was a continuation of the Round Table. After the death of Lord Milner in 1925, references to the Round Table became rare, and more often people began to speak of the Royal Institution. In 1931, Toynbee gave a speech in Copenhagen, in which he declared:  

“We are currently working with all who can make all the nation-states of our world forget about the mysterious power called sovereignty. And we constantly deny what we really do .

Nicholas Hagger believes that Toynbee was more American than British, as most of the funding came from overseas, from the Rockefellers:  

“For 40 years, Toynbee was actively involved in the RIIA’s efforts to create a world government. In his writings, Toynbee argues that nation states are withering away and will be supplanted by the “Rockefeller” world government. Although Toynbee’s work is fascinating, it is unfortunately completely unreliable .

Toynbee was a prominent member of the Fabian Society, ideologically close to the Labor Party. Toynbee and his associates Herbert Wells,  Bertrand RussellBernard Shaw, brothers Julian and Aldous Huxley did not rule out that the international socialist movement would become one of the possible ways to create the One State. In particular, Toynbee and his associates were very impressed by the Bolsheviks’ commitment to internationalism, although the Fabians and employees of the Royal Institute did not share communist views.

Among those who surrounded Toynbee, many understood that the building of the One State was a task for the distant future. It is necessary to move towards the cherished goal gradually. The creation of a united Europe, in which individual states would dissolve their sovereignty, was considered as a closer goal. Toynbee managed to live up to this time, when the Treaty of Rome was signed in 1957 by six European states (1957), and later the European Economic Community (EEC) began to be created.

A year after the establishment of the RIIA, a mirror institution was created on the other side of the Atlantic Ocean, called the  Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) . The origins of the organization were Colonel House and  Paul Warburg  (1868-1932) – one of the initiators of the creation of the US Federal Reserve System. CFR members   included Woodrow Wilson, Colonel House, and a number of other influential politicians, bankers and businessmen. Particularly noteworthy are members of the Council such as  John Foster Dulles  (served as Secretary of State under President  Eisenhower ) and his brother  Alain Dulles (future first head of the CIA). A close informal relationship was established between John Dulles and Arnold Toynbee. John Dulles, as Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the Rockefeller Foundation, has helped ensure that the Royal Institution receives regular financial support from the Foundation.

All publications on the Royal Institution usually refer to the  Chatham House Rule . It assumes that participants in closed meetings have no right to disclose the authorship of those other opinions outside the small circle of RIIA members  . Opinions can be published, but as impersonal. The rule is intended to encourage maximum openness and frankness in internal meetings. The official mouthpiece of the institute is International Affairs  and World Review .

Since 2005, the Royal Institution has established a prize – the  Chatham House Prize . It is awarded annually to “the statesman or organization that Chatham House members believe have made the most important contribution to improving international relations in the past year .” 

Continue Reading
Advertisement

DO NOT MISS

Trending