Politics in the new Golden Age could look a lot more like very old politics than something entirely new or merely a step-by-step evolution of the existing politics in the western world.
Long ago, in Anglo-Saxon times in Britain, there was a type of politics which is hardly an ideal model because there was a lot of inter-tribal and inter-regional warfare going on, and top-level status and wealth was gained more through warfare than good sense.
Their politics did, however, have some ingredients which are worth noting, such as:
They had a bottom-up democracy whereby decisions or requests for new laws were conveyed from the local people up a chain of political bodies, e.g. from community through township, through counties up to the region’s kingdom. Decisions were taken at the lowest level possible by a group of people selected on merit by people at that level.
They had a culture of cooperative community in which members of the community helped to defend, develop and sustain the community through thick and thin.
They had ecological sustainability, which is to say they farmed what they needed in such a way as to keep the land healthy, without needing to move around like the nomads before them.
In this model, there was a higher degree of responsibility for oneself and responsibility for the community by everyone than there is in today’s western society, in which most people have little inclination, even if they had the political power, to take an active share of responsibility for the whole community.
I’ve been involved in promoting this Anglo-Saxon model since 2003, as you could see on the Independent Mercia website and in the photo below. As you’ll see from this and elsewhere in these writings, I’ve got a background in all the issues I’m raising, going back at least as far as the 1980s in some cases.
Today we are learning a lot about the impact that human communities have on our environment. There seems to be little we can do about it, because too much damage has been done, the problem seems too large, and we lack the political power to deal with it; so we leave the problem in the hands of the Government and hope for the best, or just ignore the problem altogether. That’s another reason why this isn’t a Golden Age.
Today in the western world there is a kind of politics which is so far out of reach that ordinary people have no knowledge of it whatsoever. At best, one may speculate that there is at least one level of government behind the scenes of what we think of as “our Government”.
This is obvious from the fact that we have a mainly two-party type of government and, no matter which is in power, things scarcely change, as if someone behind the scenes is running an agenda.
For instance, the monetary system, which is probably the single most determining factor in how our economy works, is given to the banking industry to organise. Somehow, the National Debt, which is owed mainly to the banks, keeps on growing beyond inconceivable levels. What’s wrong with this picture? Most countries in the world have ridiculously high levels of National Debt, mostly owed to the banks. Something wrong here?
I’ll give you more references to where this information comes from, but for the moment let me say that there is a plan to create a One World Government, a single world currency and a single world religion.
Whose plan is this? How is it being developed? Can we see evidence that it’s on the way? What’s the European Union all about? Is that a model for World Government? If all the Americas formed a union, and all the African countries, and all the Asian and Australian countries formed unions, would the One World Government be just one more step away?
And wouldn’t this be a good thing? Would it stop the incessant wars, and “regime change” and “creating democracy” that various countries seem apt to engage in?
In principle, the concept of a One World Government may be a good one. But in practice, it would depend on the agenda of the people who would create it – who are creating it.
My impression is that the people who are currently creating a One World Government are not the people who could have the best interests of the world and its peoples at heart.
A new and very far-reaching initiative was launched by the United Nations in September 2015, called the 2030 Agenda. This has stated objectives for every aspect of society, under the heading of “Sustainable Development”. It sounds as if it’s exactly what the world needs, but there are indications that it’s a trojan horse, containing an underlying agenda to create something like a One World Government which will be communistic in nature, and everyone will be restricted in their everyday lives to an extent which will look like enslavement. That would simply be a progression from today’s enslaving people to the repayment of the National Debt, a debt created when the banks create all the money to be repayable with interest.
So the United Nation’s agenda for a One World Government is due for completion by 2030.
Is this what you would choose to be part of?
You can see that there’s a major disconnect between the ideas of a new Golden Age beginning in the very near future, and an agenda for an enslaving One World Government in 2030.
These could be reconciled if the people who are driving the agendas towards a One World Government have the right motives which, as I said above, I believe the current regime of One World creators do not.
If part of the process of enabling the new Golden Age were an awakening by the mass of people to the malignancy of the current regime of One World creators, then it’s conceivable that the agendas could be taken over and steered in a better direction.
At this time of writing, Donald Trump is the President-Elect for the U.S.A., and he is my hope for the overthrowing of the current Establishment, which he has as much as stated is one of his aims (“Drain the Washington swamp” is one of them).
Similarly, in the U.K., the recent Brexit vote was, at least in part, a challenge to the Establishment who took the U.K. into the European Union, bringing about ever-increasing union and the loss of U.K. sovereignty and control of the nation’s borders. As people learn more about the issues and wake up to what may be lost if they don’t assert their democratic rights, more may be learned about the even-larger agendas which threaten to strip away their freedoms and rights altogether.
However, neither in Donald Trump’s case nor in the Brexit case is it a “done deal”, with threats from all directions to reverse any possibility of changing the original course. It still remains to be seen whether the people’s call for freedom from the over-powerful Establishment will bear fruit.
Perhaps the prophesied advent of a new Golden Age will prove to be a wild card even greater than Donald Trump and the Brexiteers have played already.