rkm website: http://cyberjournal.org
Dear Mr. Moore,I’ve just read an article by you about New World Order taken from globalresearch.ca and translated on the Italian website comedonchisciotte.orgWell, it was impressive, not to say terrifying. It seems like the 1% of human race is getting to rule the 99%. And it seems like we cannot escape.
In your opinion, is it possible for us, common people, to make something to go against this possible future?
Please be patient, you have a really scared Italian girl here.Thank’you for your attention,G
Thanks for your message. I must ask you to be patient as well, because there is no short answer to your very important question. The good news is that if we can make something at all against this future, we can make something that’s a whole lot better. On one side of the coin is fear of where we’re headed now, on the other side of the coin is hope in where we could go instead, if we really try, working together.
Actually, the 1% has been ruling for the past 6,000 years. No one even questioned that in the days of kings and emperors, before so-called ‘democracy’ came along. And competitive-party ‘democracy’ was always a scam, designed to be corrupted, an oligarchy in disguise. In the case of your Berlusconi, there hasn’t even been a disguise.
Yes I think it is possible for we common people to make something to go against this possible future. And with the Occupy movement, and all the various street demonstrations, protests, and strike actions around Europe, there is clearly widespread activist energy available. As there should be, given the deteriorating conditions, and the sellout of governments to the banks. The potential is there for an effective mass movement. What is needed is the correct focus.
In order for an effective movement to emerge, in my view, there are two ‘awakenings’ that are needed. The first awakening is what my article is about: we are in the midst of an elite-orchestrated system collapse, to be followed by an elite-run global technocratic system. Even if one doesn’t believe what’s happening is planned, it is still obvious, given the kinds of measures being pursued, and the hundred-trillion-euro derivatives bubble that is yet to burst, that the debt burdens will never permit a recovery of growth to occur.
With this understanding, it soon becomes clear that the best national strategy is to detach the ship of state from the sinking global Titanic: to reclaim full national sovereignty, repudiate the odious bailout debts, restore the national currency, and organize the economy around national self-sufficiency, plus whatever mutual-benefit trade is available. Difficult as that path may be, it is doable, and it is preferable to certain destruction. “Sovereignty Once Again!” needs to be the rallying cry of the movement.
The second awakening is about the national political parties and political leaders: they are part of the problem, not part of the solution. Their very identity is with the global financial system and Brussels, and their main job is selling austerity to us. They would be scared to death of sovereignty, and would have no idea how to run things on their own. They are not leaders, they are power brokers and con artists, the best in the game.
With this additional understanding, it becomes clear that protesting, demanding, or seeking to influence the government, is a waste of time. The ‘business’ of the movement is to organize, spread the word, and grow. It needs to be inclusive of all political persuasions, and all walks of life, unified only by the shared goal of building a nation together that works. In this way it can grow large enough that it can sweep the national elections with its own slate of non-partisan candidates. Even better if this is happening in more than one nation.
The movement has other ‘business’ as well: as it grows, it needs to build the infrastructure of a grassroots-based democratic society; indeed, it needs to become the infrastructure of such a society. This is not something that is done in the streets, nor is it done in large-scale conferences or conventions. Such forums are good to share what has been done, and to find mutual courage, but the work of building democracy, and building the movement itself, needs to be focused at the local level, even down to the neighborhood level.
Democracy is about people deciding together how to run their affairs: whether it be a movement, a community, or a society. In our hierarchical society, as cogs in the system, with assigned roles, competing ever since school days, we don’t learn how to ‘decide together’. Until we learn how there can be no democracy, and it is at the local level that we can learn.
When the focus of movement building is local, the community provides a ‘space of ongoing connectedness and communication’ in which the mechanisms of dialog, inclusiveness, and decision making can evolve and develop over time, in a continuous social setting. Building the movement locally becomes a laboratory for learning self-governance. And as people learn how to find their common purpose, with all voices heard, that is a very empowering experience, both personally and collectively.
From a political perspective, the first ‘victories’ of the movement would be at the municipal level, when enough people have been included in the movement to elect their own slate of candidates. The local government then becomes an agency to implement the empowered will of the people, rather than an authority telling the people what to do. A ‘will of the people’ will then exist, as now it does not exist, because of the self-governance mechanisms the movement has developed. The growth of the movement then becomes a matter of capturing territory, fractally upwards. The growth of the movement, and the evolution of a self-governing society, are one and the same thing.
That’s the short version of my answer. Thanks again for writing.
face your demons,
The Elite Plan for a New World Social Order
on Global Research: http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=27188