We must not yield to those seeking global governance

May 28, 2024

Some of the countries on Earth are independent. Some are voluntarily members of a group. Others are ruled and totally controlled by another country. America, blessedly, is an independent nation, and has been since 1776.

When our country was organizing after declaring and winning its independence from the British empire, the Founders worked hard and long to design a nation that would be sustainable, successful and somewhat unique.

Their design has proven to be a very good one. “Today, it parallels old empires like Rome and Britain in scope, aesthetics, and influence,” WorldAtlas online notes. “Rome's legal system, infrastructure, and language permeated the known world, much like the USA's cultural exports, English language, and democratic principles. Britain's former naval prowess and colonies echo the USA's global military bases and economic reach. However, the USA differs in its soft power emphasis, using cultural, economic, and political influence more than direct colonial control.”

The WorldAtlas description continues: “Fueled by immigration, innovation, and resources, it emerged as a global power post-WWII. Its strengths lie in its diversified, technologically-advanced economy, military supremacy, and cultural influence. Furthermore, as it occupies a fairly isolated continent, it is currently near-impossible to successfully invade.”

For nearly 250 years the US has been a nation of individual freedom that has made great contributions to life on Earth. Its government has held fairly strong on the ideals upon which it was built, including being an important nation in the interests of the world, using its influence and strength generally for its benefit as well as the common good, and at the same time maintaining and protecting its national independence.

The USA belongs to and participates in many international organizations, offering its knowledge and wisdom to help solve international problems. And it is the wisdom of our unique design that has allowed the US to provide such leadership to the rest of the world.

There are political and ideological factions within the country that actually want to abandon what made America the great, often world-leading nation it became. Their desires and actions have often been in plain sight for many years, and their actions have actually moved the country in small steps toward that goal.

Included in this movement is a path toward one-world government. Organizations like the United Nations, the World Economic Forum and the World Health Organization seek to control some of what many or all nations do, or perhaps to be part of a world government.

An attitude contrary to things the US currently and historically does is alive and well, and factions in the US seem all too eager to change them.

One example of shifting national control to an international agency is the plan supported by the Biden administration to give away American sovereignty by supporting two World Health Organization (WHO) treaties. This has received very little public discussion.

Signing onto these treaties would transfer to the WHO the rights of states to make decisions on public health. However, the federal government does not possess the right to do this under the U.S. Constitution, even if taking this action was a sensible thing to do. And, we must recognize that anything that subverts the nation’s ability to make its own decisions to another nation or international body is foolish in the extreme.

This action is opposed by the Republican Attorneys General in 22 states. In a letter put together by Montana’s Attorney General, Austin Knudsen, the AGs said, “We will resist any attempt to enable the WHO to directly or indirectly set public policy for our citizens.”

This significant threat to our independence and national sovereignty is discussed on ConservativeHQ.com, a site operated by Richard A. Viguerie. It says, “The WHO will discuss drafts of its proposed pandemic agreement and amendments to the International Health Regulations at the upcoming World Health Assembly, May 27 to June 1. The proposals aim to give the WHO more authority to prevent, prepare for and respond to pandemics.”

The 22 Attorneys General believe that these amendments would “transform the WHO from an advisory, charitable organization into the world’s governor of public health.”

And ConservativeHQ notes that “[a]t the end of May, President Biden intends to join other nations in supplanting our Constitution and the liberties it guarantees with something called ‘global governance.’”

“Their plan, which has been stealthily negotiated for several years at the World Health Organization, would permit no informed debate – let alone require the approval of the American people through their elected representatives in the United States Senate.”

This is wrong on many levels. It goes against our Constitution, and the idea of an independent constitutional republic that it created.

Because of its unique design the US has amassed great successes over its nearly 250 years of existence. It must not become just one of dozens or hundreds of nations following a path determined for it by others. Many of them hope to see the US lose its independence, and become a nation of sheep doing what they are told by the elite globalists. 

We the people must make the important determinations for our country, and protect the freedoms the Founders so judiciously provided for the people.

Globalist elites meet again this month in Davos, Switzerland

January 23, 2024

You may have heard a good bit lately about what’s going on in Davos, Switzerland. It is the annual winter conference of the World Economic Forum (WEF). For many, perhaps most people, the WEF is just a name without definition.

So here, from Britannica online, is some background: “World Economic Forum, international organization that convenes an annual winter conference, traditionally in Davos, Switz., for the discussion of global commerce, economic development, political concerns, and important social issues. Some of the world’s most prominent business leaders, politicians, policy makers, scholars, philanthropists, trade unionists, and representatives of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) attend the meetings. Headquarters are in Cologny, near Geneva.”

This annual get-together ran five days, from January 15 through 19, under the theme “Rebuilding Trust.” Topics for discussion fell under three headings: global, industry and economic.

Taking part in the WEF were more than 300 public figures, which included over 60 heads of state and government, plus there was representation from key regions of the world. 

Leading the conference was Klaus Schwab, who is the founder and executive chairman of the organization. Schwab founded a meeting of European corporate leaders interested in making their businesses competitive with American firms way back in 1971. In his day job, Schwab is “a German scholar of business policy and a professor at the University of Geneva.”

The name “World Economic Forum” became effective in 1987, reflecting “the importance of global economic and political issues, including poverty, environmental problems, and international conflict, which it immediately began working to resolve,” the Britannica article tells us.

However, like what happened with the United Nations, the actions of the WEF are not always in the best interest of everyone in the world that it hopes to rule one day.

On that topic, Britannica had this to say. Despite some successes, “the WEF was heavily criticized in the late 1990s by antiglobalization activists, who accused the organization of disenfranchising poorer countries through an excessive promotion of global capitalism. 

“The American political scientist Samuel P. Huntington labeled the group ‘a watering hole for the elite’ and coined the term ‘Davos Man,’ a pejorative reference to the WEF member, whom he believed possessed an erroneous sense of international identity. Protests over the group’s activities continued into the early 21st century, and the group responded by extending forum invitations to NGOs and developing countries and introduced the Open Forum Davos (2003), a free public forum held in parallel with the WEF.”

Sometimes American presidents attend, and sometimes not. President Joe Biden did not attend this year, and former President Donald Trump did not attend this year. Barack Obama, George W. Bush and George H.W. Bush all skipped Davos during their presidencies.

However, some administrative and Congressional personnel did attend. Democrats who attended this year include: Secretary of State Antony Blinken, Labor Secretary Marty Walsh, climate chief John Kerry, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, White House national security adviser Jake Sullivan, Sen. Chris Coons of Delaware, Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, New Jersey Rep. Mikie Sherrill, and Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker.

Republicans that attended include: Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp, and Florida Rep. Maria Elvira Salazar. Independent Sen. Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona also attended.

One other person from the U.S. to attend and speak to the group was 

Heritage Foundation President Kevin Roberts. Talking about the next U.S. administration, he said: “I will be candid and say the agenda that every single member of the administration needs to have is to compile a list of everything that has ever been proposed at the World Economic Forum and object to all of them wholesale,” he said. “Anyone not prepared to do that and take away this power of the unelected bureaucrats and give it back to the American people is unprepared to be part of the next conservative administration.”

Dealing with specifics of what the WEF does that is so disagreeable, he said 

that it promotes illegal immigration as a positive for our country, and that it does not present a public safety threat in large American cities. He argued against the prevailing idea of the WEF that climate change is catastrophic. 

The WEF’s soft attitude toward China brought this comment from Roberts. “China, the No. 1 adversary not just to the United States, but to free people on planet Earth. Not only do we at Davos not say that, we give the Chinese Communist Party a platform.” 

To a group of global elitists who firmly believe they are capable of deciding for all of the rest of us what the entire world must do to sustain the Earth, these and the other wonderful ideas they conjure up may seem beneficial. But as Roberts pointed out, some of them are just plain dangerous for the United States.

And, we should take note that the WEF’s ideas closely match those of the Biden administration.

The United States has for nearly 250 years had a government design where the people of the country determine its course. That has worked very well. And despite the current efforts to undermine that unique design, it is still the best ever. We must not surrender to a global elite.

Globalism poses a silent threat to all America is and has been

A word that is used rather frequently these days is “nationalist,” frequently when people refer to President Donald Trump. That term is generally used as a pejorative to accuse Trump of viewing America as the nation superior to all others, but more than that as the country that should dominate all others in every way imaginable.

This point of view is the result either of people who don’t understand Trump, or those who deliberately attempt to gin up resentment and negative feelings toward the president. There are more than enough of both types of these folks to go around.

Trump has even adopted the term for himself, but his use of it is that of “patriotism,” or having strong positive feelings about America, as well as a devotion to it. That is a position that every president needs and must have. 

Many of these folks who call Trump a nationalist are the polar opposite of that mistaken image of Trump; they are globalists. They are One World Government types, who believe and work toward a massive control mechanism everyone on Earth must obey. It would be like the United Nations on steroids. 

If your initial reaction to that idea is, “That’s not going to work. There are too many nations with different ideas of how things should be,” you have a point. 

Sure, some nations will willingly go along, like Germany and some of the others in the European Union, and some others elsewhere on the globe. The United States, however, has for its entire history done things its own way and been very successful doing that. To most clear thinking Americans, globalism is not on their bucket list, though it may be at the bottom of a trash bucket.

The only way the US will be a part of a world government is if we are forcibly made to conform or, more likely, subverted into subservience. Through such a process, strong social elements gradually are taken over and used to feed propaganda to the public. We see the news media and education systems now being transformed from their fundamental beneficial purposes to these socialist tools. 

The global warming/climate change mania is another area that is used to gently induce Americans to accept the concepts of global government through scare tactics of impending global doom. People believe this despite the highly blemished record of the climate change faction that includes outright fraud. Recently, another fallacy in this leftist demagoguery was discovered.

A scientific paper published last month in the world’s premier scientific journal “Nature” suggested ocean temperatures have risen roughly 60 percent higher than estimated. That’s scary, and numerous mainstream-media outlets widely and uncritically reported this finding.

However, mathematician Nic Lewis easily caught an error in this study: Despite the paper being automatically trusted and published in the journal, “a quick review of the first page of the paper was sufficient to raise doubts as to the accuracy of its results,” Lewis said. The authors have, acknowledged their “error.” Have you heard about this in the mainstream media?

Americans were once a group of strong, independent, self-determining men and women. We find many now who are well down the pothole-infested road to surrendering to the socialist pap that grows so quickly, being well fertilized by feel-good leftist propaganda.

Their susceptibility to such venom is in large part the result of failing critical social systems: the family, education, and the information media.

The strong, nurturing nuclear family is in shambles, and our natural defenses, our protection against dopey ideas have been weakened through professional malfeasance in the other areas.

The agenda media, that part of the news media with a clear political purpose in all it says and does, misinforms, and by careful cherry picking of news items, denies important information to the public. Such actions clearly justify President Trump’s declaring this group “the enemy of the people.”

Many teachers, especially in elite colleges and universities, apparently failed or skipped their Integrity 101 class, and now rather than helping students learn basic subject matter, believe it’s more important that they help them learn how to think “correctly” about things. 

Public education at the K-12 level helps in this effort. For some unexplained reason, there is less, or little, emphasis in teaching actual American history and classes in civics where students learn about their government, how it works and why it was established as it was.

Consequently one or more generations of Americans are un-educated or mis-educated about the fundamental principles and mechanisms of their country, which are essential to understanding America, and appreciating it for all that it is. 

Is it any wonder that so many are able to be deceived and accept notions that are contrary to the country’s principles and best interest? These folks are prime targets for the platitudes of the leftist globalist puffery.

Much of this degeneration began back in the 60s and got a boost during the catastrophic Obama administration, where America was routinely dishonored and criticized by the now former president.

Re-educating the mis-educated generations is s daunting challenge, but it can’t be ignored.