FINE WITH FOREIGN FUNDS
Ezra Levant looks at how the Rockefeller Foundation is yet another foreign source of funds for those hoping to stall the pipeline process.

—————-

• How the Rockefeller Fund Killed Keystone
• Campaign against Canadian Keystone XL pipeline driven by US foundation millions
• When Rockefeller and Standard Oil Met Their Match: Echoes
• Another example of “strategic philanthropy” in the wild

Andrew Gavin Marshall - October 26, 2010

Problem, Reaction, Solution: “Crisis is an Opportunity”

In May of 2010, Dominique Strauss-Kahn, Managing Director of the IMF, stated that, “crisis is an opportunity,” and called for “a new global currency issued by a global central bank, with robust governance and institutional features,” and that the “global central bank could also serve as a lender of last resort.” However, he stated, “I fear we are still very far from that level of global collaboration.”[1] Well, perhaps not so far as it might seem.

The notion of global governance has taken an evolutionary path to the present day, with the principle global political and economic actors and institutions incrementally constructing the apparatus of a global government. In the modern world, global governance is an inter-lapping, intersecting, and intertwined web of international organizations, think tanks, multinational corporations, nations, NGOs, philanthropic foundations, military alliances, intelligence agencies, banks and interest groups. Globalization – a term which was popularized in the late 1980s to refer to the global spread of multinational corporations – has laid the principle ideological and institutional foundations for this process. Global social, economic and political integration do not occur at an equal pace; rather, economic integration and governance on a global level has and will continue to be ahead of the other sectors of human social interaction, in both the pace and degree of integration. In short, global economic governance will set the pace for social and political global governance to follow.

Full story

Niki Raapana - Oct. 25, 2010

Q. What is communitarianism?

A. Communitarianism is a Dictatorship of the Community. Unlike communism, which established a Dictatorship of the Proletariat, communitarianism is the more advanced stage of human social evolution.

Q. Is this just a harder to pronounce version of communism?

A. No. The emerging communitarian global system has many similarities to both capitalism and communism. Most of its homeland judicial structure, land and resource use policies and social welfare programs were tested and perfected by totalitarian communists in Russia, South America, Europe and Israel. The communitarian’s financial and economic system was tested in the western imperialist and capitalist nations as well as in many of the former colonial states and developing nations classified as Third World.

Communism branched far out from its 19th century roots. Committed members evolved into Fabian Socialists, National Socialists, National Communists, Democrats, Christians, Republicans, Catholics, Fusionists, Evangelicals, Zionists, Pagans, Masons, LaRouchies and Libertarians, who all eventually adopted the common ideology of free market socialism. Imperial British American capitalists and Global Free Traders merged with mercenaries, academics, mobsters, environmental scientists and natural resource experts who all just happen to also promote free market socialism, known in academia and the higher courts as communitarianism.

The basic 1848 communist theory was that capitalism and communism were two necessary, conflicting, temporary stages in human social development. The final happy stage would arrive when the whole world descended into chaos and all sides to every conflict finally synthesized under one perfect ideology. Although Marx called the communism stage a dictatorship of the proletariat, he never said what the final stage would be called. It’s our thesis that the final stage in the Hegelian-Marxist dialectic is called communitarianism.

Full story

Matthew D. Jarvie - September 24, 2009

Russia Today has gained huge popularity over the past year among followers of the “alternative” media. While RT does feature news pieces about topics not regularly discussed in the American mainstream media, for a while I have wondered why the Russian media would have an interest in things pertaining to the New World Order, such as the manufactured banking crisis and the reality behind 9/11. After all, hasn’t Russia several times called for a New World Order and a one world currency?

Russia Today is sponsored by the state-owned Russian news agency, RIA-Novosti. Novosti was, and still is, essentially an arm of the KGB. Many believe the KGB ceased to exist with the fall of the Iron Curtain, but those who know better understand that this just isn’t the case. The Soviet system was never abolished, rather moved underground. The KGB simply changed its name and is now called the FSB (Federal Security Service of the Russian Federation).

Full story

Paul and Phillip Collins | 2008-12-01 - Zeitgeist: Addendum either intentionally or unwittingly fails to recognize the problems for what they are: contrived grievances employed as polar extremes to perpetuate a dialectical climate. Instead, Zeitgeist: Addendum portrays the problems as the natural outgrowths of America’s constitutional republican system, thereby vilifying representative democracy and enshrining the technocratic paradigm. The film’s ultimate solution is little more than a Hegelian synthesis, as is evidenced by the dialectical commonalities between the Venus Project and the globalist forces that it purportedly opposes. [Automated Opposition: The Technocratic Undercurrent of Zeitgeist: Addendum]