The Club of Rome, Climate Change and the Global Governance Agenda

xandercruise

New Blood
X
Joined
Oct 7, 2009
Messages
7
The globalist think-tank "The Club of Rome" determined in the 1970's that the only way the people of the world would accept a world government would be if there was a global threat that humanity needed to unite against:

“The common enemy of humanity is man. In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself." - Club of Rome, The First Global Revolution​

The Club of Rome’s members, including David Rockefeller, Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands, Ted Turner, Mikhail Gorbachev, and of course Al Gore, believe humanity requires “a common motivation, namely a common adversary” in order to realize world government.

A recent Club of Rome publication titled the "World Federalist Manifesto" states:

"A world government is the only solution to world problems, such as climate change and the global economic crisis. A world confederation that respects the sovereignty of world nations and that deals with the issues of international economy that cannot be dealt by one nation alone".​

The same publication calls for a new Anglo-American alliance to supplant the role of the United Nations, a global police force, a single world currency... to save the planet, of course.

It would seem that humans need a common motivation, namely a common adversary, to organize and act together in the vacuum; such a motivation must be found to bring the divided nations together to face an outside enemy, either a real one or else one invented for the purpose.

New enemies therefore have to be identified.
New strategies imagined, new weapons devised.

The common enemy of humanity is man.​

tl:dr;

The Club of Rome is propagandizing real environmental concerns to push a globalist agenda - ultimately to establish a One World Government.
 
Ah yes, the ever popular "argument by unsourced, unverified, scary sounding quotes" method that conspiracy theorists love to use. Sorry, but you'll need actual evidence for this - not that you will ever have any.

I understand that when you are on conspiracy sites the woos orgasm over scary sounding quotes that you post, but it just doesn't work here. A vast majority of the conspiracy quotes I've come across either (1) never existed, (2) are the result of disparate cut and paste jobs of various quotes strung together to mean something that was never said, or (3) are so woefully out of context that they completely lose the real meaning of the statement.

Although I have not researched this extensively google suggests your quotes are a variation of (1) and (2). I could be wrong and you can feel free to provide evidence to the primary source that contains them. The second quote exists, but its an example of (3). The actual source quote and context notes that the author isn't talking about conspiracy fantasy one world government, but a world confederation where there was some international body drawn from many nations that had the ability to coordinate issues of international importance like climate change.
http://www.mmdnewswire.com/francesco-stipo-6231.html

Did it ever occur to you that if these nefarious plots/delusions of yours actually existed, that Club of Rome spokespersons wouldn't come out and say it? Of course not, because villains in conspiracy delusions are like comic book villains: they all have to come out and tell us of their nefarious secret agenda through ominous quotes.
 
Last edited:
As a new user I am not allowed to post links. However these quotes are taken directly from the Club of Rome publications "The Limits to Growth", "The First Global Revolution", and from the recent press release for the new book ""World Federalist Manifesto" by Dr. Francesco Stipo, US Director for the Club of Rome.

These books can probably be found on Amazon or pirate PDF's can be downloaded from the usual places.

If these quotes are proven (1) to exist, (2) to be pasted intact and (3) are contextual to my summary above, will you debate the core argument that a globalist thinktank called the Club of Rome has been pushing for a global government for nearly three decades, using environmental and overpopulation concerns as the "problem" for which the only solution is a Global Government?

Edit: to respond to your edit -

Did it ever occur to you that if these nefarious plots/delusions of yours actually existed, that Club of Rome spokespersons wouldn't come out and say it? Of course not, because villains in conspiracy delusions are like comic book villains: they all have to come out and tell us of their nefarious secret agenda through ominous quotes.
Click to expand...

I didn't say it was a nefarious plot, and "delusion" is your opinion. They have been openly calling for Global Government for decades in their own publications, and it continues to this very day. If it's a conspiracy, it's an Open Conspiracy (refer: H G Wells).

Their proponents may truly believe that they are saving humanity by establishing a Global Government to deal with Global Problems such as climate change, economic crises, overpopulation and so on. They actually, truly, absolutely have been calling for a Global Government.
 
Last edited:
xandercruise said:
As a new user I am not allowed to post links. However these quotes are taken directly from the Club of Rome publications "The Limits to Growth", "The First Global Revolution", and from the recent press release for the new book ""World Federalist Manifesto" by Dr. Francesco Stipo, US Director for the Club of Rome.
Click to expand...

Google suggests the first quote appears only on woo websites, second quote is real but was taken out of context and spun by you, third quote also appears only on woo websites. I look forward to the direct sources for the other two.

xandercruise said:
If these quotes are proven (1) to exist, (2) to be pasted intact and (3) are contextual to my summary above, will you debate the core argument that a globalist thinktank called the Club of Rome has been pushing for a global government for nearly three decades, using environmental and overpopulation concerns as the "problem" for which the only solution is a Global Government?
Click to expand...

If they are not taken out of context and spun for conspiracy delusions, sure. However...its unlikely to happen. Of course you would also have to provide evidence for your core conspiracy argument that the Club of Rome wants a global government, which is not evidenced by the quotes you have provided. The quotes you have provided merely suggest that the Club of Rome advocates for a international coordinating body on some issues of international importance - not a global government.
 
Last edited:
xandercruise said:
I didn't say it was a nefarious plot, and "delusion" is your opinion. They have been openly calling for Global Government for decades in their own publications, and it continues to this very day. If it's a conspiracy, it's an Open Conspiracy (refer: H G Wells).
Click to expand...

If

The Club of Rome is propagandizing real environmental concerns to push a globalist agenda - ultimately to establish a One World Government.
Click to expand...

is NOT a nefarious plot, what is? And if its a open conspiracy, by the way, its not a conspiracy. The dictionary definition of conspiracy says to see conspire, which is defined as:

to join in a secret agreement to do an unlawful or wrongful act or an act which becomes unlawful as a result of the secret agreement
Click to expand...

xandercruise said:
Their proponents may truly believe that they are saving humanity by establishing a Global Government to deal with Global Problems such as climate change, economic crises, overpopulation and so on. They actually, truly, absolutely have been calling for a Global Government.
Click to expand...

What, exactly, is wrong with a one world government? Specifics, please.

By the way, none of the quotes actually provide evidence for any plot around a one world government. The quotes support using international bodies with actual power to coordinate on issues of international importance...which is not the same as a one world government.
 
Last edited:
Google suggests the first quote appears only on woo websites, second quote is real but was taken out of context and spun by you, third quote also appears only on woo websites. I look forward to the direct sources for the other two.
Click to expand...

The first quote can be found on page 86 of "The First Global Revolution" by Bertrand Schneider and Alexander King. If you want to buy it from Amazon, it will cost you ~ $100. The PDF can be found with some creative googling. I cannot post the link at this time.

The second quote is from a book I have not yet read as it has only just been released. From the synopsis of the book and the chapter summary at the author's website, it argues for the creation of a "World Federal Government" with global Executive, Judiciary, Legislative and Financial branches, and explains how each of these would relate to the governance of nation states. It argues for the shift "From the Creation of a Trans-Atlantic Free Trade Area to a Euro-American Union", for the creation "of a Euro-American Bank" and discusses "The End of Banknotes and the Prospective for the Creation of a Single World Currency". Sounds like the rantings of a conspiracy theorist, right?

The third quote can be found on page 75 of the third edition (1993). The book is online at the usual kinda places you would find online copies of books. See for yourself.
 
LightinDarkness said:
What, exactly, is wrong with a one world government? Specifics, please.
Click to expand...

Ahh and this is always, ALWAYS the answer I get once I have demonstrated that the Club of Rome has actually documented their desires to push for a single World Government.

The Club of Rome, made up as it is of Anglo-American Establishment Globalists, started with the premise of establishing a World Government. And then "in searching for a new enemy to unite us", the Club of Rome came up with the idea that global warming, overpopulation and other environmental concerns would serve as an ideal enemy to "unite us" in support of such a World Government.

Once I have demonstrated that Globalists are pushing for a World Government, it always comes down to "what's wrong with a World Government anyway?"

But that's a whole different argument. If you feel that the compromised "democratic" (imperial) principles of the Anglo-American Establishment should be foisted upon the entire world under a false premise of saving the planet from humanity, you are free to hold that opinion. I for one, am skeptical.

And if its a open conspiracy, by the way, its not a conspiracy.
Click to expand...

I was referencing the book by mediocre sci-fi author and fabian socialist H G Wells, in which he argues for the open creation of a Global Government. It's like the novel 1984, if it had been written from Big Brother's perspective. Very enlightening!
 
Last edited:
xandercruise said:
The first quote can be found on page 86 of "The First Global Revolution" by Bertrand Schneider and Alexander King. If you want to buy it from Amazon, it will cost you ~ $100. The PDF can be found with some creative googling. I cannot post the link at this time.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I've seen to many fake quotes with page numbers - and of course we need to read the context first even if it does exist.

xandercruise said:
The second quote is from a book I have not yet read as it has only just been released. From the synopsis of the book and the chapter summary at the author's website, it argues for the creation of a "World Federal Government" with global Executive, Judiciary, Legislative and Financial branches, and explains how each of these would relate to the governance of nation states. It argues for the shift "From the Creation of a Trans-Atlantic Free Trade Area to a Euro-American Union", for the creation "of a Euro-American Bank" and discusses "The End of Banknotes and the Prospective for the Creation of a Single World Currency". Sounds like the rantings of a conspiracy theorist, right?
Click to expand...

The second quote I found on a PR press release, but you took it way out of context - it doesn't at all say what you claim it does.

Actually, none of those things are the rantings of a conspiracy theorist. They are perfectly sound proposals, although they won't ever actually happen in our life time.

The third quote can be found on page 75 of the third edition (1993). The book is online at the usual kinda places you would find online copies of books. See for yourself.[/QUOTE]
 
xandercruise said:
Ahh and this is always, ALWAYS the answer I get once I have demonstrated that the Club of Rome has actually documented their desires to push for a single World Government.
Click to expand...

Actually its always the first question I ask, its just that I was amused at first with the argument by quotation method you used. In any case, you have yet to demonstrate that the Club of Rome is actively pushing for a single world government. You have demonstrated that there MAY (since we can't verify the quotes yet) be evidence for the Club of Rome advocating for the use of international coordinating bodies for importance issues. This is not global government. In the event that the quotes are accurate and in context, that is all you have provided evidence for. Nothing more.

You would also need to tell me why we should care what the Club of Rome wants. There are lots of public policy interest groups out there, and they advocate for things ranging from the mundane to the insane. The Club of Rome is simply one among many, and there is no evidence nor reason to believe we should care about what they want.

xandercruise said:
The Club of Rome, made up as it is of Anglo-American Establishment Globalists, started with the premise of establishing a World Government. And then "in searching for a new enemy to unite us", the Club of Rome came up with the idea that global warming, overpopulation and other environmental concerns would serve as an ideal enemy to "unite us" in support of such a World Government.
Click to expand...

But of course thats not what the quote says at all - it says that when considering the issues of the world today, they consider climate change to be a problem. Thats their opinion, nothing nefarious about it.

xandercruise said:
Once I have demonstrated that Globalists are pushing for a World Government, it always comes down to "what's wrong with a World Government anyway?"
Click to expand...

Of course globalists are pushing for a one world government..thats why they are globalists. This is sort of like demonstrating classical libertarians support free markets. Of course you haven't demonstrated at all is that the Club of Rome is doing this.

xandercruise said:
But that's a whole different argument.
Click to expand...

Its really not a whole different point, it is THE point. Unless you can demonstrate whats so horrible about global government, all the conspiracy theory over it really doesn't mean anything.

xandercruise said:
If you feel that the compromised "democratic" (imperial) principles of the Anglo-American Establishment should be foisted upon the entire world under a false premise of saving the planet from humanity, you are free to hold that opinion. I for one, am skeptical.
Click to expand...

The problem is that you have no evidence that anyone is advocating for global government being forced upon anyone. By supporting a one world government it does not mean anyone supports forcing it, nor does it state what sort of government it envisions. Good to hear you hate those evil, American democratic principles though.

And of course, your knocking down a strawman - no one I have seen advocating for a global government has stated that it will save the planet, merely that it might be better than what we currently have.

Now, please answer the question - even if someone were to advocate for one world government (which you have not yet proven), whats so bad about it?
 
Last edited:
xandercruise said:
If these quotes are proven (1) to exist, (2) to be pasted intact and (3) are contextual to my summary above, will you debate the core argument that a globalist thinktank called the Club of Rome has been pushing for a global government for nearly three decades, using environmental and overpopulation concerns as the "problem" for which the only solution is a Global Government?
Click to expand...
They've been flogging the idea for 30 years and have gotten nowhere. *Yawn* Wake me up when the action starts.
 
Now, please answer the question - even if someone were to advocate for one world government (which you have not yet proven), whats so bad about it?

Its really not a whole different point, it is THE point. Unless you can demonstrate whats so horrible about global government, all the conspiracy theory over it really doesn't mean anything.
Click to expand...

Well, from the libertarian perspective, increasing the size of government always leads to more bureaucracy, more corruption, increasing loss of civil liberties... and you can't get much bigger than a World Government. Would this World Government be directly elected by the governed? Would the World Citizen have any means of influencing the political decisions of the World Government? If the World Government were to become infested with corruption or tyranny, would there be anywhere to escape to? Global Government could be a vehicle for Global Tyranny. But that's just the paranoiac in me speaking..

I am trying to demonstrate that Climate Change and other genuine environmental concerns have been cynically co-opted by Globalists who have as their core agenda to establish a One World Government (whether that's a good or bad thing). That's the "conspiracy theory." If you read the source material you will see that I am not overblowing this or taking anything out of context.

It seems you want to argue the semantics of Global Government versus "Global Governance". The end result is the same: unelected globalists setting political agendas that override local, community or even national concerns.

Old, fat men in suits 10000 miles away dictating the parameters of your existence. It's a conspiracy!
 
Do you have a link to an agenda or talk where the topic is establishing a world government to deal with the problems to be discussed?
 
xandercruise said:
There's the whole Copenhagen/Climategate thing going on right now. It's pretty much exactly what I'm referring to here.
Click to expand...

Which brings us up against the classic problem that all conspiracy theories face. Once a conspiracy gets too big, it becomes unsustainable.

In the case of the global warming conspiracy... if there is a conspiracy... the cover has already been blown. Your global elite has let the cat out of the bag.

Decades, if not centuries, of effort wiped out in a matter of minutes by an enterprising hacker with a home PC and a gmail account.

Maybe the next group of social climbers with an agenda will come up with something a little more "streamlined"?
 
xandercruise said:
The globalist think-tank "The Club of Rome" determined in the 1970's that the only way the people of the world would accept a world government would be if there was a global threat that humanity needed to unite against:

“The common enemy of humanity is man. In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself." - Club of Rome, The First Global Revolution​
Click to expand...

I have read part of the book that this quote comes from: The First Global Revolution. Except this is the full quote:

"The common enemy of humanity is man. In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like, would fit the bill. In their totality and their interactions these phenomena do constitute a common threat which must be confronted by everyone together. But in designating these dangers as the enemy, we fall into the trap, which we have already warned readers about, namely mistaking symptoms for causes. All these dangers are caused by human intervention in natural processes, and it is only through changed attitudes and behaviour that they can be overcome. The real enemy then is humanity itself."​

Have you actually read the book? If so, why did you edit the quote in exactly the same way that conspiracy websites all over the internet have?

If that other book is online, I would like a link to it.
 
grandthefttoaster said:
I have read part of the book that this quote comes from: The First Global Revolution. Except this is the full quote:

"The common enemy of humanity is man. In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like, would fit the bill. In their totality and their interactions these phenomena do constitute a common threat which must be confronted by everyone together. But in designating these dangers as the enemy, we fall into the trap, which we have already warned readers about, namely mistaking symptoms for causes. All these dangers are caused by human intervention in natural processes, and it is only through changed attitudes and behaviour that they can be overcome. The real enemy then is humanity itself."​

Have you actually read the book? If so, why did you edit the quote in exactly the same way that conspiracy websites all over the internet have?

If that other book is online, I would like a link to it.
Click to expand...
xandercruise said:
If these quotes are proven (1) to exist, (2) to be pasted intact and (3) are contextual to my summary above [...]
Click to expand...


That's one out of three, xandercruise... You're not looking good.
 
xandercruise said:
It would seem that humans need a common motivation, namely a common adversary, to organize and act together in the vacuum; such a motivation must be found to bring the divided nations together to face an outside enemy, either a real one or else one invented for the purpose.

New enemies therefore have to be identified.
New strategies imagined, new weapons devised.

The common enemy of humanity is man.​
Click to expand...

You said this quote was from The World Federalist Manifesto. I don't know because I haven't read it, however it looks more like this is a combination of several sentences from Chapter 5 of The First Global Revolution pieced together (this time I'll highlight the sentences that you are using, instead of the other way around.):

This period of absence of thought and lack of a common vision - not of what the world of tomorrow will be, but of what we want it to be so that we can shape It - is a source of discouragement and even despair. How simple it was, or should have been, for France. Great Britain and their allies to mobilize against their common Nazi enemy. And was it not obvious during the period of the cold war, that the Western nations should accomplish a diplomatic. economic and technological mobilizaoon against the Soviet Union and its satellite countries? Again, freedom fighters, despite tribal and ideological differences, were able to find unity and strengthened patriotism in the struggle for independence their common enemy, the colonial powers. It would seem that men and women need a common motivation, namely a common adversary against whom they can organize themselves and act together. In the vacuum such motivations seem to have ceased to exist - or have yet to be found.

The need for enemies seems to be a common historical factor. Some states have striven to overcome domestic failure and internal contradictions by blaming external enemies. The ploy of finding a scapegoat is as old as mankind itself - when things become too difficult at home, divert attention to adventure abroad. Bring the divided nation together to face an outside enemy, either a real one. or else one invented for the purpose. With the disappearance of the traditional enemy, the temptation is to use religious or ethnic minorities as scapegoats, especially those whose differences from the majority are disturbing.

Can we live without enemies? Every state has been so used to classifying its neighbours as friend or foe, that the sudden absence of traditional adversaries has left governments and public opinion with a great void to fill. New enemies have to be identified, new strategies imagined, and new weapons devised. The new enemies are different in their nature and location, but they are no less real. They threaten the whole human race, and their names are pollution. water shortage, famine, malnutrition, illiteracy, and unemployment. However, it appears that awareness of the new enemies is. as yet, insufficient for bringing about world cohesion and solidarity for the fight. Also the failure of many ideologies has removed some of the necessary points of reference.​

The sentence The common enemy of humanity is man appears on a different page, in that other paragraph you quoted from.

Notice that they are talking about how societies have behaved historically, not some master plan.
 
Last edited:
xandercruise said:
Well, from the libertarian perspective, increasing the size of government always leads to more bureaucracy, more corruption, increasing loss of civil liberties... and you can't get much bigger than a World Government. Would this World Government be directly elected by the governed? Would the World Citizen have any means of influencing the political decisions of the World Government? If the World Government were to become infested with corruption or tyranny, would there be anywhere to escape to? Global Government could be a vehicle for Global Tyranny. But that's just the paranoiac in me speaking..
Click to expand...

Ah, yes... standard Libertarian anti-government paranoia. Lovely.

I am trying to demonstrate that Climate Change and other genuine environmental concerns have been cynically co-opted by Globalists who have as their core agenda to establish a One World Government (whether that's a good or bad thing). That's the "conspiracy theory." If you read the source material you will see that I am not overblowing this or taking anything out of context.
Click to expand...

First, you are trying to demonstrate nothing. You are making wild claims which you cannot back up with solid evidence.
Second, as has been shown, there is no conspiracy at all. Everything that is happening is happening right there, out in the open.
Third, how can we read the source material if you do not provide us with a means of checking it?

It seems you want to argue the semantics of Global Government versus "Global Governance". The end result is the same: unelected globalists setting political agendas that override local, community or even national concerns.
Click to expand...

It seems you want to scare us into believing your BS conspiracy crap. Your claim, you prove it - that´s how things work here.

Old, fat men in suits 10000 miles away dictating the parameters of your existence. It's a conspiracy!
Click to expand...

No. It´s your paranoia.
 
Have you actually read the book? If so, why did you edit the quote in exactly the same way that conspiracy websites all over the internet have?
Click to expand...

Yes I have two versions of the PDF right here. I admit that I copied the quotes directly from green-agenda dot com, which lists a bunch of quotes from various Club of Rome publications including The First Global Revolution and Limits to Growth. The "conspiracy" websites obviously borrow from one another, but you have not argued that the quotes are factually incorrect. They are simply disparate yet within context of my core argument.

You said this quote was from The World Federalist Manifesto. I don't know because I haven't read it, however it looks more like this is a combination of several sentences from Chapter 5 of The First Global Revolution pieced together
Click to expand...

Ahh sorry, I didn't mean to suggest that these snippets were from World Federalist Manifesto - they are actually from the First Global Revolution. Yes, I mashed them together.

Notice that they are talking about how societies have behaved historically, not some master plan.
Click to expand...

Yes, but they are using this historical analogy to illustrate the importance of propagandizing a cause to achieve consensus:

"The new enemies are different in their nature and location, but they are no less real. They threaten the whole human race, and their names are pollution. water shortage, famine, malnutrition, illiteracy, and unemployment. However, it appears that awareness of the new enemies is. as yet, insufficient for bringing about world cohesion and solidarity for the fight."

Awareness -> world cohesion -> acceptance of global "enemy" -> acceptance of global governance.

Ah, yes... standard Libertarian anti-government paranoia. Lovely.
Click to expand...

You know what the antithesis to Libertarian (notice I used a lowercase L) anti-government propaganda is? Statist Authoritarian Propaganda. What sort of skeptic is pro-government? Does not compute.

First, you are trying to demonstrate nothing. You are making wild claims which you cannot back up with solid evidence.
Click to expand...

I'm not making any wild claims. Do you deny that Globalists support Globalization? Do you deny that Globalists support the consolidation of economic and political system into a single Global System? Do you deny the definition of Globalism? I'm merely highlighting select morsels from the documentation produced by globalists. I'm cutting and pasting with wild abandon, but I think the literature speaks for itself.

Second, as has been shown, there is no conspiracy at all. Everything that is happening is happening right there, out in the open.
Click to expand...

Exactly. The Club of Rome advocating global governance is not a conspiracy theory. That is my entire point. At a surface level it sounds preposterous, but in actuality some of the "global government conspiracy" theories have a solid foundation in truth.

Third, how can we read the source material if you do not provide us with a means of checking it?
Click to expand...

Surely as a user with some 6000 post on this forum, you would know that a new user is not allowed to post links to external sites? Stay tuned for a flood of scribd and google books links to my source material!

It seems you want to scare us into believing your BS conspiracy crap. Your claim, you prove it - that´s how things work here.
Click to expand...

We have already established that this is not really "conspiracy crap", since the globalists have openly published their agendas. I'm not trying to scare anyone, I'm trying to get you guys to explain why my conclusions regarding the Club of Rome's documented globalist agenda are not correct. So far, the only compelling argument is "context". Yet I have read these documents, and many many more, and I can assure you that the context in which I have presented these documents has not been shaken by any of the counterpoints raised in this thread.

No. It´s your paranoia.
Click to expand...

Who told you I was paranoid???
 
Last edited:
xandercruise said:
Yes I have two versions of the PDF right here. I admit that I copied the quotes directly from green-agenda dot com, which lists a bunch of quotes from various Club of Rome publications including The First Global Revolution and Limits to Growth. The "conspiracy" websites obviously borrow from one another, but you have not argued that the quotes are factually incorrect. They are simply disparate yet within context of my core argument.
Click to expand...

So why did you not post the full quote? Just so you could make it fit the picture you are trying to build better? That's not very honest.

I am familiar with green-agenda.com. Some time ago, I looked into some of the quotes that they have on their home page. I found that many of them were out of context bullspit. Like this one:

green-agenda.com said:
"The only way to get our society to truly change is to frighten people with the possibility of a catastrophe." -Daniel Botkin
Click to expand...

Now take a look at the full quote, from the original article by Daniel Botkin:

"Some colleagues who share some of my doubts argue that the only way to get our society to change is to frighten people with the possibility of a catastrophe, and that therefore it is all right and even necessary for scientists to exaggerate. They tell me that my belief in open and honest assessment is naïve."​

When you put it in context, the entire meaning changes. Does it bother you that sites like this are basically lying to you? Conspiracy theorists say that people are sheep for believing the government, but they never seem to mind when other conspiracy theorists treat them like sheep.

Ahh sorry, I didn't mean to suggest that these snippets were from World Federalist Manifesto - they are actually from the First Global Revolution. Yes, I mashed them together.
Click to expand...

So why did you mash them together? Did you think that people were too dumb to figure it out themselves?

Yes, but they are using this historical analogy to illustrate the importance of propagandizing a cause to achieve consensus:

"The new enemies are different in their nature and location, but they are no less real. They threaten the whole human race, and their names are pollution. water shortage, famine, malnutrition, illiteracy, and unemployment. However, it appears that awareness of the new enemies is. as yet, insufficient for bringing about world cohesion and solidarity for the fight."

Awareness -> world cohesion -> acceptance of global "enemy" -> acceptance of global governance.
Click to expand...

You are creating your own interpretation here, or more likely the interpretation of others, like green-agenda.com, that tell you what to think. If your interpretation is so obvious, then why didn't you just quote the entire thing in context, instead of building your own quote out of random sentences? Why do you not quote sentences like the following, which don't fit into the picture you are trying to paint?:

"Global governance' in our vocabulary does not imply a global 'government', but rather the institutions set up for cooperation, coordination, and common action between durable sovereign states." The First Global Revolution page 73​

"In many fields governments have come to realize that the effective deployment of their most cherished right, their sovereignty, requires that it be pooled with the sovereignty of other nations, in order to do things that none of them can do alone. In this sense, cooperation does not mean relinquishing sovereignty, but rather exerting it through joint action— instead of losing it or just not using it." The First Global Revolution page 73​

Have you ever posted here before under a different name by any chance?
 
Last edited:
Others have already shown the nature on his quote mining and distortions, so I'll just point out yet another mistake:


xandercruise said:
“The common enemy of humanity is man. In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself." - Club of Rome, The First Global Revolution​
Click to expand...

xandercruise said:
The first quote can be found on page 86 of "The First Global Revolution" by Bertrand Schneider and Alexander King. If you want to buy it from Amazon, it will cost you ~ $100. The PDF can be found with some creative googling. I cannot post the link at this time.
Click to expand...


Actually, that mis-quote is found on page 75. Odd sort of error for someone who has the pdf right in front of them, but something to be expected from someone who is just cutting and pasting from some other site, without doing any fact checking.

Here's a link that gives you most of this document: Go take a look at both pages 75 and 86, and form your own opinion of xandercruise's reliability.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/2297152/A...t-Global-Revolution-Club-of-Rome-1993-Edition
 
Welcome xandercruise.

I acknowledge that the Club of Rome is a quite influencal think tank, lobbying for a global government structure dealing with global issues. But.

xandercruise said:
The Club of Rome’s members, including David Rockefeller, Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands, Ted Turner, Mikhail Gorbachev, and of course Al Gore
Click to expand...


Gorbachev and Queen Beatrix are honorary members of the Club of Rome. I'm not aware that Rockefeller, Turner and Gore have anything to do with them. What's your source?

The Club of Rome is, like the name suggests, very much a european organisation in origin. It's no coincidence that the german wikipedia is the only one with a Club of Rome memberlist.

I think that your sources are lying about the nature of these peoples intent. The latest document the Club of Rome has published on their website is only a month old. If their agenda is a totalitarian world dictatorship run by a small bankster cabal, how do you explain the following paragraphs:

Club of Rome Amsterdam Declaration said:
The economic “progress” of the past decades has been accompanied by increasing concentrations of income, wealth and by rising levels of inequality, exclusion and environmental degradation. The world of finance, in particular, has become an end in itself. The continuing dominance of the financial sector over public policy leads to a concern that the lessons learned from the recent financial crisis will quickly be forgotten and powerful interests will again demand conditions of minimum regulation that can only lead to greater crises in the future.

The finance industry must be converted into an instrument to promote ethical, equitable and sustainable world development. Banks and businesses must increasingly see their role as providing services to society: we must move from fast money to slow money. Insider trading must be prosecuted more severely as organized crime; corruption must be strongly repressed, and tax evasion through off-shore trusts and foundations must be stopped by disclosing the beneficiaries; speculation with essential commodities such as oil and food must be disallowed. Corporate incentives for bankers and money managers to seek high-risk, short-term returns should be discouraged.
Click to expand...


I for one completely agree with this. Who could disagree? Alex Jones?

The problem is that corporate and financial globalization are already reality, while there is no democratic global structure to protect the people from their machinations. I'm all for developing one.

btw, the PDF in my sig (five pages) is written by Hans-Peter DürrWP, who is a close associate and also a honorary member of the Club of Rome.

Potsdam Manifesto
 
Last edited:
xandercruise said:
Well, from the libertarian perspective, increasing the size of government always leads to more bureaucracy, more corruption, increasing loss of civil liberties... and you can't get much bigger than a World Government. Would this World Government be directly elected by the governed? Would the World Citizen have any means of influencing the political decisions of the World Government? If the World Government were to become infested with corruption or tyranny, would there be anywhere to escape to? Global Government could be a vehicle for Global Tyranny. But that's just the paranoiac in me speaking..
Click to expand...

Well, Xander, it looks like your quotes did after all fit the quote mining CT techniques I discussed in my first response. Since every quote matched the distortion of (1)-(3) I outlined above, so far you have not provided any evidence of this globalist agenda.

Unfortunately, your response about why global government is such a horrible thing is also not satisfactory. I am a libertarian, and there is no evidence to think that a global government would equate into some sort of loss of liberties. Indeed, a global government would provide more liberties - for the first time we might actually be able to travel freely. For the first time, we could enforce human rights on a global level.

Your views about what a one world government must mean, unfortunately, do not seem to have any relationship to reality. I know of no one who would like a one world government who advocates doing it by force or doing it via dictatorship.

xandercruise said:
It seems you want to argue the semantics of Global Government versus "Global Governance". The end result is the same: unelected globalists setting political agendas that override local, community or even national concerns.
Click to expand...

This is not true except in CT delusions. There are literally countless ways to have a elected global government with representatives held accountable to local issues.

xandercruise said:
Old, fat men in suits 10000 miles away dictating the parameters of your existence. It's a conspiracy!
Click to expand...

Why do you have a problem with old people or overweight people? Or people dressed well? None of these things affect peoples ability to govern.
 
xandercruise said:
It seems you want to argue the semantics of Global Government versus "Global Governance". The end result is the same: unelected globalists setting political agendas that override local, community or even national concerns.
Click to expand...


This is the world view of ignorance; of someone who pays no attention to local government.

I don't know what it's like in your part of the world, but here in the United States we have locally- and state-elected officials, too; not just the President and Vice President of the country. We also have laws on the local and state level that can vary significantly from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.

Why do you believe this would suddenly go away in a global government?
 
Horatius said:
Here's a link that gives you most of this document: Go take a look at both pages 75 and 86, and form your own opinion of xandercruise's reliability.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/2297152/A...t-Global-Revolution-Club-of-Rome-1993-Edition
Click to expand...

Everyone should take a look at the book, especially Chapter 5. When you atually read it, instead of just believing what some crappy site says, it becomes clear how much he is distorting it.

Childlike Empress said:
Gorbachev and Queen Beatrix are honorary members of the Club of Rome. I'm not aware that Rockefeller, Turner and Gore have anything to do with them. What's your source?
Click to expand...

He might be mixing the Club of Rome up with the Club of Madrid and the Club of Budapest. The green-agenda.com site treats them as if they are the same organization.
 
Last edited:
Thank you grandthefttoaster and Childlike Empress for your well thought out responses. You have given me much to think about and I am in the process of verifying some of these supposed "facts" that are to be found at sites like Green Agenda.

LightinDarkness said:
I am a libertarian [snip] we could enforce human rights on a global level.
Click to expand...

Enforce? That doesn't sound very libertarian to me :)

LightinDarkness said:
Why do you have a problem with old people or overweight people? Or people dressed well? None of these things affect peoples ability to govern.
Click to expand...

Why so serious?

Childlike Empress said:
Welcome xandercruise.

I acknowledge that the Club of Rome is a quite influencal think tank, lobbying for a global government structure dealing with global issues. But.

Gorbachev and Queen Beatrix are honorary members of the Club of Rome. I'm not aware that Rockefeller, Turner and Gore have anything to do with them. What's your source?
Click to expand...

Thanks for the welcome :) I honestly expected a lot more vitriol and invective to be hurled in my direction when I started this thread, but so far everyone has been relatively friendly.

So far in my ongoing research I have found no firm evidence that ties Ted Turner to the CoR - apart from him expressing similar (and in some cases, more extreme) views on environment and overpopulation.

Similarly with Al Gore. I have found on the USA CoR website an obituary that refers to Al Gore working with some of the founders of USA CoR and perhaps attending some of their seminars in the past, but it does not refer to him as an actual member. You would think they would boast about this if it were true.

And with David Rockefeller, who has his fingers in almost every globalist pie, I have found no firm evidence that he was one of the CoR's co-founders or that he has ever been a member. They may have made him an honorary member in the past, as they have with many green-friendly world leaders. I'm not even sure that David Rockefeller is green-friendly, come to think of it.

As for the World Federalist Manifesto and the USA CoR - there are national Club of Rome's all over the world that work from the same core principles, host the same kind of seminars and guest from other CoR's around the world. They claim to be independent organizations with aligned interests and philosophies with the original CoR.

The problem is that corporate and financial globalization are already reality, while there is no democratic global structure to protect the people from their machinations. I'm all for developing one.
Click to expand...

When will people learn? Democracy just doesn't work.

Thanks for the replies everyone. You haven't alleviated my paranoia whatsoever, but you have encouraged me to fact check my sources. Always a good thing.
 
xandercruise said:
Enforce? That doesn't sound very libertarian to me :)
Click to expand...

Just goes to show how little you know about libertarian values :)

xandercruise said:
Why so serious?
Click to expand...

Well..you said you had a problem with it, not me.

xandercruise said:
So far in my ongoing research I have found no firm evidence that ties Ted Turner to the CoR - apart from him expressing similar (and in some cases, more extreme) views on environment and overpopulation.

Similarly with Al Gore. I have found on the USA CoR website an obituary that refers to Al Gore working with some of the founders of USA CoR and perhaps attending some of their seminars in the past, but it does not refer to him as an actual member. You would think they would boast about this if it were true.

And with David Rockefeller, who has his fingers in almost every globalist pie, I have found no firm evidence that he was one of the CoR's co-founders or that he has ever been a member. They may have made him an honorary member in the past, as they have with many green-friendly world leaders. I'm not even sure that David Rockefeller is green-friendly, come to think of it.
Click to expand...

Its takes a lot for a conspiracy theorist to admit when they are wrong. Careful, we might turn you into a skeptic.

xandercruise said:
When will people learn? Democracy just doesn't work.
Click to expand...

Works great. Every system of government has its problems, including democracy. So far, its worked out as one of the best.

xandercruise said:
Thanks for the replies everyone. You haven't alleviated my paranoia whatsoever, but you have encouraged me to fact check my sources. Always a good thing.
Click to expand...

Well that is a pity - there is no need for you be paranoid about this sort of stuff because it isn't going to change anything. Its sort of like all the conspiracy theorists who stay up all night worrying over the fictional Illuminati. If they redirected that paranoia/fear at something else they could be quite productive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom