Global Technocracy: How the New World Order Is Being Built Through “Build Back Better”
by William S. Hahn, Chief Executive Officer
The glorious governmental system the Founding Fathers devised through divine inspiration has no equal in terms of providing an environment of freedom for its citizens to prosper. Americanism was created and implemented to protect our God-given rights and to limit the government, not the people. It’s a system that our enemies must overcome if they are to control us. To do so, an ever-increasing level of government must be in place — particularly a federal government operating outside of its limitations, along with unaccountable bureaucracies both inside the federal government and outside in the form of regional governmental bodies.
As former JBS CEO Arthur Thompson covered in his excellent overview of the Council on Foreign Relations, In the Shadows of the Deep State, our enemies looking to overthrow freedom have deep-rooted origins. Out of the Illuminati came connections that reached to Karl Marx and Frederick Engels. Both authored a book called The Holy Family, published in February 1845. As Mr. Thompson wrote, this book was written “three years prior to ‘The Communist Manifesto.’”
In The Holy Family, Marx and Engels wrote, “The revolutionary movement which began in 1789 in the Cercle Social … gave rise to the communist idea … re-introduced in France after the Revolution of 1830 …. This … is the idea of the new world order.”
Boiling it down, advocates of the New World Order seek to create a world government that all countries would be subservient to. Yet, this world government would not be some mere body above our own federal government that helps to resolve problems with other countries. No, it would have complete control and would also be the final authority in domestic affairs. Think of it as the European Union on steroids.
While the New World Order pushed by Marx and Engels was socialist and communist in nature, the actual structure of what the world government would look like is very much in flux. The best contemporary examples include the United Nations and the regional unions (with unaccountable bureaucracies) that many countries are embroiled in. However, as Alex Newman reported in his video “New World Order = Global Technocracy” on TheNewAmerican.com, the New World Order may be neither capitalist nor communist in nature. Rather, it will be a technocracy. Mr. Newman explains it would get rid of individual liberty in exchange for “saving” the environment. All of this would be run by technocrats, including scientists and engineers, under the control of the elite.
The pioneer researcher of technocracy is Patrick Wood, with his seminal books Technocracy Rising: The Trojan Horse of Global Transformation (2014) and Technocracy: The Hard Road to World Order (2018).
As Mr. Newman explains in his video, Mr. Wood’s newer book detailed a definition of technocracy from advocates in 1938 as, “The science of social engineering; the scientific operation of the entire social mechanism to produce and distribute goods and services to the entire population.” Mr. Newman rightfully interpreted this as a direct attack on private property, money, and the free market-based economy. The goal is to exchange these for various other items to transition to a resource-based economy (think central planning). The scientific community and other technocrats would determine what is produced and how it is produced and distributed according to efficiency, environmentalism, and community needs.
Advocates of this type of scientific dictatorship are not just found on the proverbial left. Technocracy has made inroads with certain conservatives and libertarians through at least two widely popular online “documentaries”: Zeitgeist: The Movie and 2030 UnMasked. As is usually the case, there are some salient points made in the videos, but there’s lots of garbage sprinkled in between. At the end of each of these videos, a pitch is made for technocracy.
Advocates have made arguments for environmental protection, Earth’s carrying capacity, and, of course, a resource-based economy.
JBS publications have been exposing the buildup to this for many decades. One of the earliest mentions was in the March 1962 issue of American Opinion, in an article titled “The European Common Market” by Hans F. Sennholz. He was sounding the alarm bell of the market’s working “towards the development of an international economic bureaucracy with its central planners, statisticians, econometricians, and technocrats, with international investment control and all the rest.” While the planners succeeded in doing so, Mr. Sennholz also pointed out in the article, “The growing popularity of the European Economic Community must be seen in the light of American foreign trade debate. Many Washington voices seem to imply that all we have to do to solve our foreign problems and such domestic problems as economic stagnation, gold and dollar problems, and unemployment is to reduce our tariff barriers and team up with the European Common Market. Pressures are mounting for our entry into the Common Market.”
This globalist/internationalist push of the 1960s has only strengthened in subsequent years, and has advocates on both sides of the political aisle. As Senator George Malone exposed in his 1958 book Mainline, trade is used as a bludgeoning tool to overcome a country’s sovereignty and help create a New World Order.
In 1970, elite globalist Zbigniew Brzezinski wrote Between Two Ages: America’s Role in the Technetronic Era. According to the November 1977 issue of American Opinion, he wrote in it, “Marxism represents a further vital and creative stage in the maturing of man’s universal vision. Marxism … is a victory of reason over belief.”
No matter how new the proposed system to replace our current one may seem to be, it always comes back to what JBS Founder Mr. Robert Welch described as our “fatal struggle for freedom against slavery, for existence against destruction.” And when you peel back the curtain, you will find evil manifesting itself, usually through humanity’s old foe of communism.
According to a 1988 article in The New American, in his book Brzezinski promoted “‘a global tax system’ to support a world government.” The Sixteenth Amendment established an income tax in 1913, giving the federal government half of the equation it needed to ensure a steady stream of income into its coffers. The other half was done later that same year through the establishment of the Federal Reserve (it is usually pointed out that there is nothing federal or reserve about it!).
As Clarence Carson wrote in an article in the July 8, 1981 issue of Review of the News:
The Federal Reserve finances the government deficit by buying securities and flooding the country with paper money. In consequence, prices, wages, and incomes rise. As income rises, taxpayers move into higher tax brackets…. The political advantage of this setup is that government revenues can increase by hundreds of billions of dollars without any change in the tax rates. Indeed, government revenues will likely increase much more rapidly than does the rise in prices, thanks to the graduated feature of the tax….
Knowing that the Fed and the income tax work together to redistribute wealth in America, global-government advocates have been salivating at the prospect of replicating this on a global scale to help build world government infrastructure and programs. While the Fed has been all too happy to inflate the currency supply whenever called upon for help (as exposed by the 2010 limited audit authorized by the Dodd–Frank Act), a worldwide tax system would give globalists a reliable source of revenue to accelerate implementation of their programs.
For several years, globalists in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) have been working on establishing a global minimum corporate tax rate. In early October, it announced an agreement between 136 countries, including the U.S., that “will fundamentally transform the international tax landscape within which multinational enterprises operate by reallocating certain profits to markets and by putting a floor on tax competition so as to ensure that at least a minimum amount of tax is paid,” according to the October 2021 “OECD Secretary-General Tax Report to G20 Leaders.”
As The New American reported, “President Joe Biden, a cheerleader for the new agreement, cited it as ‘proof that the rest of the world agrees that corporations can and should do more to ensure that we build back better.’”
The OECD envisions a “two-pillar solution” that will bring in $275 billion annually once both pillars are implemented in 2023. According to the OECD, “Pillar One will ensure a fairer distribution of profits and taxing rights among countries with respect to the largest and most profitable multinational enterprises. It will re-allocate some taxing rights over MNEs [multinational enterprises] from their home countries to the markets where they have business activities and earn profits, regardless of whether firms have a physical presence there.”
“Pillar Two introduces a global minimum corporate tax rate set at 15%. The new minimum tax rate will apply to companies with revenue above EUR 750 million …. Further benefits will also arise from the stabilisation of the international tax system and the increased tax certainty for taxpayers and tax administrations.”
The logistics of how this will be accomplished have not been released, but Alex Newman has exposed the International Monetary Fund and the United Nations as being “at the center of these global financial manipulations.” His exposé of global taxing efforts was published in the April 21, 2014 issue of The New American. As Mr. Newman pointed out, the IMF “literally looted the bank accounts of private individuals in Cyprus as a trial run at worldwide wealth confiscation.”
The IMF could certainly be the vehicle to collect the tax, assuming that each participating government goes along with it, ceding sovereignty and privacy rights to a global institution operating outside of each government’s accountability.
Let’s realize that corporate taxes are merely the beginning. Given the precedent set in Cyprus, having the IMF reach into Americans’ accounts for a “Climate Change Tax” may not be too much of a stretch to further fund the infrastructure of global government.
We can fathom that many governments will quickly join the effort, while others will fold to the pressure, passing supporting legislation. Even our own Congress has a good chance of folding, unless there is significant support to stop it. Congress has displayed quite an appetite for globalist programs, especially trade agreements that have linked both sides of the political aisle, as seen in the passage of the United States–Mexico–Canada Agreement during President Trump’s term.
Technocracy is not a passing fad. It’s been discussed since the 1930s and advocates are now ramping up their efforts. But we’re not even scratching the surface here. In a new book coming out at the end of this year, Dennis Behreandt, publisher of The New American, offers a jaw-dropping look at where technocracy is heading. The book is tentatively titled End Game: An Examination of the International Elites’ Trend Toward Ending Humanity as We Know It. It looks at the rarely spoken but disquieting topics of transhumanism, eugenics, population reduction, and related technologies that form the basis for the way the New World Order elites are taking technocracy and tyranny to whole new levels.
Let’s keep in mind that to stop this, there must be an organized effort to do so. This is why we are here — to expose this type of slavery before it gets forced upon the American people; to stop these evil and diabolic plans, preserving the great experiment of freedom started by the Founding Fathers so long ago; and to restore Americanism, so it too can reach its potential, serving as a shining example of what free people can accomplish.
We must prioritize the solution: working to get America out of globalist institutions like the United Nations. We must once again dedicate substantial time and resources in building support to Get US Out! We must generate substantial pressure for Congress to make this a priority. How do we do it? Exactly as we’ve always done it: Birching!
Let’s outline some of the steps we can take:
- Work locally, educating our local communities and the electorate as a whole.
- Work through the state legislatures.
- Work at the federal level.
We should apply the majority of our efforts to Step 1, working locally. Then focus as much time and effort as possible on Step 2, influencing our state legislators. Over time, working in these areas should reduce the amount of work necessary at the federal level.
Our 100/10/6 program was created as a way to distribute our TRIM (Tax Reform Immediately) bulletins in the 1990s, and it proved to be very beneficial in building influence and educating electorates. If you’re not familiar with this concept, read Midwest Regional Field Director Robert Owens’ great summary of it in the “Recruiting” column in the August 2021 Bulletin. You can find archived copies of the Bulletin in the Members Area of JBS.org.
Also, our video The Power of 500 highlights the concept and how to apply it. Please review this and share it with others. It’s on the JBS YouTube account (https://youtu.be/47vf04LlHYY), as well as in the video section of JBS.org (https://jbs.org/video/join/the-power-of-500-informed-electorates-that-work/). Furthermore, we are working on new resources to help you carry out the 100/10/6 program.
Working locally means Chapter activities geared toward raising awareness of the problem of globalism, how the United Nations is a major hub, and how “Build Back Better” — which originated as a globalist UN slogan and program — is Biden’s agenda to replace Americanism with globalism.
Over the years, we have made significant inroads in educating the public on the dangers of the United Nations. Now it’s time for this to become a pivotal program that exposes and stops “Build Back Better.” With your help and leadership, we will see this come to fruition. Look around; the opportunities are endless, but begin locally. Happy Birching!