A “BOLD NEW WORLD” AND “FORCES TOO POWERFUL”
By Dennis L. Cuddy, Ph.D.
September 19, 2011
[Note: On September 14, 2011, World Bank Group president Robert Zoellick delivered a speech in which he advocated a “new world economy” including “modernized multilateralism” which is “beyond dependence.” In this system, he said there would be a “New Normal” that “will be fluid and at times volatile—with more shocks and crises….” And relevant to the Power Elite’s timetable for a world currency in 2018 and later fulfillment of their plan for world government, he indicated there should be “fiscal union” instead of just “monetary union.” He said, “It is not responsible for the Eurozone to pledge fealty to a monetary union without facing up to…a fiscal union that would make monetary union workable….” To see the strategically important positions Zoellick previously has held, look toward the end of my October 20, 2008 NewsWithViews column, “The People’s Republic of America.”]
William Knoke is founder and president of the Harvard Capital Group, which advises “global corporations.” And in his book, Bold New World: The Essential Road Map to the Twenty-First Century (1996), Knoke projects that “in the twenty-first century, we will each retain our ‘indigenous’ cultures, our unique blend of tribal affiliations,… yet our passion for the large nation state, for which our ancestors fought with their blood, will dwindle to the same emotional consequences of county or province today. A new spirit of global citizenship will evolve in its place, and with it the ascendancy of global governance.”
Knoke’s vision is not new, as noted Fabian and historian Arnold Toynbee in a paper presented in early June 1931 remarked: “A local state may lose its sovereignty without losing those familiar features which endear it to the local patriot—such features, I mean, as the local vernacular language and folk-lore and costume, and the local monuments of the historical past…. [But] if we are frank with ourselves, we shall admit that we are engaged on a deliberate and sustained and concentrated effort to impose limitations upon the sovereignty and the independence of the… sovereign independent States…. The dragon of local sovereignty can still use its teeth and claws when it is brought to bay. Nevertheless, I believe that the monster is doomed to perish by our sword. The fifty or sixty local states of the world will no doubt survive as administrative conveniences. But sooner or later sovereignty will depart from them.”