The New World Order - A Faustian Bargain

Tyler Durden's picture

Submitted by Jeff Thomas via Doug Casey's International Man blog,

Faustian bargain: An agreement in which a person abandons his or her spiritual values or moral principles in order to obtain wealth or other benefits. A deal with the devil.

The argument over the existence of an Elite, who plan to control the entire world under a New World Order like some great yo-yo, has been around for a long time. Not surprisingly, events created by world leaders of all stripes in recent years give rise to an increasing belief in the likelihood of the existence of such an effort.

There are two great dangers in attempting to describe this perceived secret endeavour, and they are at opposite ends of the spectrum: a) being so naive as to assume that no collusion exists amongst various groups of leaders to further their respective ends, and b) over-simplifying such alliances to suggest that there is an Elite Master Plan that all members implicitly agree upon and follow in every respect.

Assumption A

In any country, the citizenry are accustomed to such acts of collusion as all the petrol suppliers raising the price by the same amount, overnight. Few individuals would doubt that the two companies get together well in advance to agree on the price hike.

The same sort of collusion can be expected between banks and governments, etc. However, most people in any given country seem to believe that the political parties that rule them do not collude in their own collective interest and against the best interests of their respective constituents.

Similarly, they are unlikely to accept that fascism exists in their country—that members of their favoured party collude with industries. Further, most people seem to disbelieve that the leaders of their own country collude with the leaders of their country’s enemies in such a way that might create loss or danger to their own people. This is naive. Such collusions are the norm rather than the exception.

Assumption B

Those who tend to be more informed, readily acknowledge that collusion exists between all of the above, to one degree or another. If this group errs, it is often in the opposite assumption—that the collusion is all-encompassing.

There can be no doubt that a New World Order is being sought by some—this has been made clear for at least a hundred years by many who regard themselves as an Elite. It is therefore an open secret. As stated by David Rockefeller in his memoirs:

Some even believe we are a part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure—one world, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty and I am proud of it.

But the error that is most common amongst those who oppose a New World Order is the extent to which they believe the collusion exists. Many believe the collusion is total. That is, a Master Plan exists amongst the world’s leaders (the heads of the central banks, the Bilderberg Group, the leaders of the most powerful nations—or the whole gang of them—take your pick) that all members agree upon in detail and in full.

Still, when any New World Order opponent rails against the latest perceived move by the Elite, if asked the question, “Do you really think that these people are so unified that several hundred of them get together every week around a conference table to decide who to victimise this week?,” most will say that, no, they may act in concert, but not in so total a fashion.

Option C

So, is there a third perception as regards those in high positions who collude on a large scale? In my opinion there is.

In my experience in dealing with political leaders (and political hopefuls) from several jurisdictions, I’ve found there to be a consistent sociopathology (by definition, the desire for dominance over others, undeserved self-confidence, lack of empathy, a sense of entitlement, lack of conscience, etc.). Whether they are British members of Parliament or US members of Congress, they tend to display the same sociopathic traits.

Sociopaths are drawn to political leadership for obvious reasons. First, they’re prone to collusion, as they recognise that it may further their interests (agreements with a small group of individuals that would allow for dominance over another, larger group of individuals). And this, of course, fits well into Assumption B.

Trouble is, the same sociopathology would drive the same individuals to seek to dominate each other. Yes, they would enter into agreements with one another, but even as they are making them, they would be planning to deviate from them.

Any agreement regarding increased power for all members, defining what seat each would have at the table, may be agreed, but immediately after, each would begin jockeying for a better seat. Further, whatever agenda is agreed upon, each would already have a secondary agenda for his own betterment even as the agreement is being forged.

Any attempt at a New World Order, if it were to succeed in creating unified dominance, would never reach full fruition, as so many disparate individuals would be plotting for a bigger piece of the pie from the outset.

As regards the desire to follow a Grand Plan, we are not describing the meek Kool-Aid drinkers of Jonestown, Guyana, whose willingness to follow a Master Plan was unquestioningly due to their extremely low self-esteem. We are describing those with the opposite mental makeup—those who are compulsive in their desire for dominance of others (first their minions, then their partners).

Further, each would promote his own sphere of power. A banker would seek to have the group’s means of control be economically based; a general would seek to have the means of control be militarily based; etc.

Dissent Among the Ranks

The push-and-pull of sociopathic leaders is unending. Their very makeup dictates that each one individually will always be vying for more. In order to achieve that, they will form subversive subgroups that will agree on a separate direction from what has been agreed by the primary group, and along the way, each one, in his lack of conscience and loyalty, might betray both the primary group and the subgroup.

In the end, there’s no question that there are those who consider themselves to be part of a New World Order, as so many have publicly stated so themselves, for generations. Also, there can be little doubt that each member expects to come out of the deal as a ruler, not as one of the ruled. Further, the effort is ongoing and growing, and will result in great damage for the average person who, in most cases, simply wishes to be left alone to run his own life.

It has been postulated by many that those who see themselves as an Elite are nearing the completion of what they perceive as world dominance. However, should they succeed, they will betray their partners the very next day, as it’s their nature to do so. Their behaviour would likely be that of a group of cats with their tails tied together.

So, what might we take away from this discussion? First, that there most assuredly are extremely domineering forces (regardless of how closely associated they might be), which, in the near future, will do immense damage to the cause of freedom in the world, particularly in those countries where they are most dominant, or will become most dominant. Second, the situation does appear to be reaching a head.

The two greatest uncertainties will be how much damage will be done before the dust has settled, and how protracted the period of destruction and struggle for dominance might be.

Ultimately, for the reasons stated above, I don’t believe the New World Order concept can fully prevail, but it can and will do damage of unprecedented proportions in the attempt to implement it. Those involved will not be swayed from their individual or collective objectives (consider Adolf Hitler or Josef Stalin).

The best that can be done is to work at placing ourselves as far outside of their sphere of influence as possible.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Flying Wombat's picture

 The “Jackass of the Week” award can easily be declared early. Donald Tusk, President of the European Council (actually, his “media team,” but whatever) had the stones to tweet the following...

Full story, click here:

Oh regional Indian's picture
  • All governments suffer a recurring problem: Power attracts pathological personalities. It is not that power corrupts but that it is magnetic to the corruptible. Such people have a tendency to become drunk on violence, a condition to which they are quickly addicted.
    • Missionaria Protectiva, Text QIV (decto)
Chuck Walla's picture

Like the commies, whoever was at the top would get busy killing all the rivals. It's a self-solving problem as they kill each other. But a lot of people will get taken with them.


BuddyEffed's picture

In a world of resource constraints with contracting extraction and contracting economies, this sociopathetic behavior is dangerous.

Note the intentional mis-spelling.  SocioPATHETIC :-)

TahoeBilly2012's picture

I will take Option D- The Khazar's

BobPaulson's picture

The key is to see that the politicians are not in charge. Their time is too short, their focus is on reelection, so they are not long game planners. In constantly seeking reelection, they are doing the bidding of the funders who are the long game planners. The politicians also serve to distract the wage earners towards wedge issues that appear to have left/right false dichotomies entrenched in superficial struggles around religion, culture and race. Meanwhile, the guys with the cash and the puppet strings in their hands continue to own and operate the system.

lucitanian's picture

A simplistic and irrelivant comment to say thye least. I guess you are suggesting that communism can only be represented as resulting in the Soviet experience and application of draconian power. Or in other words there cannot by communism because the "committee" will always be corupt and an elite of sociopaths will always arrise. So what's the difference? FORWARD NEO-LIBERALISM?

The problem is that institutions favour the inequality, and promote the sociopaths, perhaps communism less so than capitalism.Its not that capitalism won the race, it just came second last at the end of the world....

raywolf's picture

great article... two important points missing :


1.) If the Catholic Church couldn't hold together with God and Sin as incentives, there is no way some illuminati elite can hold together (absent aliens with super weapons dishing out insttructions and running the planet as some human farm - as per Jupiter Ascending). To serve a common cause there must be a higher power above and beyond everyone. God didn't do the trick, so the devil wouldn't work either. Must be real and tangible and very immediately threatening.

2.) Politicans are psychos because they have zero talent. Narcisstics that never achieved anything. They are worse than rock stars who at least had to write a few good songs and learn the guitar, go on demanding tours etc. Allowing these people in power with absolutely no litmus test as to their ability (other than as lying, grafting salesmen), is humanities biggest mistake.

Look at any leader, even half decent ones like Thatcher, they never did anything other than tell other people what to do.... at least Reagan was a successful actor, a real and demanding business that requires at least a small amount of actual skill, albeit one of the easiest professions you can choose. 

Engineers, Scientists, Business leaders, those who have had a real career in the private sector with proven success... these are people that might make good leaders - and it's a big 'might'.



MonetaryApostate's picture

Sin itself is the control the elite have over everyone else, e.g. the allure of what they offer (Money), but control is an illusion, just like money, and that control is about to be shifted.. (by God, as it is promised in the bible, which I'm sure will soon come to pass.)  Moreover, I'd have to disagree with you on one point, they do have talent, and they are very talent at what they do, e.g. jacking everyone else for what they work hard to build...

Jack Burton's picture

That all elites don't agree on everything does not mean that they aren't working to restore fuedalism with a modern version. And one world government is just what they strive for. Why is the USA pushing for war with Russia and China? Because they offer the only resistance left to the Banker elites and Zionism. The Zion project works in every nation and they coordinate for one goal, one power. The Zion take over of America took 50 years of hard work, but they have won. Reagan through them out of his White House, now they own the White House. You see, it takes time to win, but they are winning, big time.

Salah's picture

This 1-world govt bullshit arose out of the horrors of WW2, as did many decent institutions that have accomplished great good. The problem is a 1-world govt is simply unworkable in the absence of a 1-world mindset, and that idea can only come about with the preponderence of some serious extraterrestrial evidence.  And then you run into Stanton Friedman's quandary about the nation-state.  If such ET evidence was disclosed, what happens to the nation-state, that previously withheld the evidence, when its citizens see themselves as "citizens of the world" vs. citizens of the USA, Brazil, etc? 

Counterpunch's picture
Counterpunch (not verified) Salah Jun 8, 2015 10:08 PM

I think a good case can be made that one world government had its origins before, and certainly after world war 1, a war and time period which saw, as it happens, tremendous growth in the power of Zionism in the US and UK, and in a broader sense, in Russia and eastern europe.

But - you could probably go back to the period after Napoleon, or earlier, with the very origin of central banking lending to sovereigns.


I'd provisionally offer Waterloo as a watershed moment for both banking and, in inchoate form, global Zionism.  But - interesing and complex question.  Certainly post world war 2, and post cold war were giant leaps...

ThirteenthFloor's picture

Salah you have not read Carroll Quigley's, Tragedy and Hope amongst a lot of written work from 1865, including imperialistic Cecil Rhodes. Anyways New World Order gains steam at WW1, particularly in US literature.

How old is this idea "I want to rule the world" or "united under one leader" ? Twisted men have wanted a single empire since the dawn of time.

Ghordius's picture

specifically, Carroll Quigley's book "Tragedy and Hope" paints a realistic picture of Cecil Rhodes and his dream of Imperial Federation

the goals of the Imperial_Federation_League are still alive, particularly in the British Commonwealth:

a world led by an open society of educated English-speaking leaders operating through a federation of states where education, English, democracy, liberalism, capitalism and free markets are the norm

(I'm writing this without sarcasm or any colour. every word is carefully chosen and describes how they thought and how many still think about this)

note, in this, that US literature between WWI and WWII was strongly antagonistic to this dream. later, the US started to lead, in a way unwittingly, in the fulfillment of this dream

note, also, that for non-English speakers this is "NWO", as much as for critics of some aspects of Cecil Rhodes' dream

doctor10's picture

the 'purpose" of WW I was to rid the world of monarchs-particularly Christian Monarchs

raywolf's picture

i think you have it backwards... an attempt to install one world government was the cause of WW2, not the other way around...

Fun Facts's picture

The protocols were made public over 100 years ago.

The Zionist World Order or New World Order [ZWO / NWO] is the desired outcome. It will be accomplished by control of the money and the media.

Goyim are mentally inferior and can’t run their nations properly. For their sake and ours, we need to abolish their governments and replace them with a single government. This will take a long time and involve much bloodshed, but it’s for a good cause. Here’s what we’ll need to do:

0 Place our agents and helpers everywhere
1 Take control of the media and use it in propaganda for our plans
2 Start fights between different races, classes and religions
3 Use bribery, threats, blackmail, lies and deception to get our way
4 Use Freemasonic Lodges to attract potential public officials
5 Appeal to successful people’s egos
6 Appoint puppet leaders who can be controlled by blackmail
7 Replace royal rule with socialist rule, then communism, then despotism
8 Abolish all rights and freedoms, except the right of force by us
9 Sacrifice people (including Jews sometimes) when necessary
10 Eliminate religion; replace it with science and materialism
11 Control the education system to spread deception and destroy intellect
12 Rewrite history to our benefit
13 Use our media to create entertaining distractions
14 Corrupt minds with filth and perversion
15 Encourage people to spy on one another
16 Keep the masses in poverty and perpetual labor
17 Take possession of all wealth, property and [especially] gold
18 Use gold to manipulate the markets
19 Introduce a progressive tax on wealth
20 Replace sound investment with speculation
21 Make long-term interest-bearing loans to governments [FED, IMF, BIS, ECB]
22 Give bad advice to governments and everyone else
23 Blame the victim

Billy Bob101's picture

@Fun Facts     I read the Protocols years ago.  It says (and I'm quoting from memory) "How will we take over the world?  By international trade.  Not one person in a thousand will have the intelligence to see what we are doing and the few who are we will ridicule into silence."  This is exactly what has happened, is it not?

Future Jim's picture

They will not break ranks too much because they are all blackmailable. They all make eachother go to parties where children are raped and even killed. The very few who still try to break ranks too much are simply killed. How does Doug casey not know this? It is almost as if he were trying to misdirect us.

New World Chaos's picture

Yup, the puppetmasters can't trust anyone until they have proof he's a pedophile.  They even ritually abuse their own children.  It induces split personalities and enables Manchurian Candidate style mind control.  Helps people keep secrets, even from themselves.  The satanic crime families have been doing it forever.  It used to be considered black magic but then they infiltrated the CIA's MK-Ultra and Monarch mind control programs, and learned to do it scientifically.

F0ster's picture

We all know that the Zionists have achieved a coup over the U.S. and other western states but can someone give me an enlightened and accurate description of what their end game is? I'm not talking about Isreal rules the world, because this much power he'd bu one group of people people has to have an agenda and quite honestly I don't believe that gaining global domination for the Zionist is reasonable. There must be more to this and aside from the typical racist anti Semitic shit I'd love to have a real conversation about what the clear and obvious multilateral Jewish agemda is.

Counterpunch's picture
Counterpunch (not verified) F0ster Jun 9, 2015 1:44 AM

start reading the Torah.  Skip ahead to Deuteronomy chapter 7



Ward cleaver's picture

Since they control the media, and the financing behind them, we will never have that discussion. I believe the key to their success is the whole black vs white narrative they have nurtured thru their control of stories on the news. As long as people are focused on that they can continue with their "total control" agenda.

Doctor Faustus's picture

Do you really want a conversation? Or do you want confirmation bias? Here's the "Agenda": The vast majority of people who practice Judaism want to live their lives and their faith just like everyone else. However, despite the positive feelings evangelicals today have for the Jews, Christianity has always held a beligerant attitude towards Judaism, in part, because Jews deny Christ's divinity. The other side is plain economic envy (Read Mark Twain's Concerning the Jews). 

When commentators on ZH try to deny Jews' identity (Khazars, Synagogue of Satan, etc.) and participation in society (oh, look how many Jewish people are in banking!), there can be no conversation...they've already made up their mind there's a Grand Scheme of a NWO and all the Jews are in on it. 

There is no clear and multi-lateral Jewish agenda. However, there are wealthy Jewish families that want to keep and expand their wealth and power generation after generation--the same like every other non-Jewish wealthy family.

I know all sorts of Jews; Orthodox, Conservative & Reform. I do NOT personally know any Jewish billionaires (how many of you are personally connected to billionaires, Jewish or otherwise?). They don't care about me unless I can add to their wealth and power. And I don't care about them because wealth and power are not the be-all it's historically been made out to be. Afterall, you can't take it with you.

The Torah (Five Books of Moses) was given to the Israelites to better themselves not conquer the world. Per Christian theology, Jesus was sent to fulfill the Law and the New Testament is proof of that. That men choose to follow their own centric morality and forsake higher morals goal is not God's failing, but Man's. 

There is no central authority in Judaism; not the Chief Rabbi of Israel, some rabbi on TV, or some wealthy oligarch who happens to be Jewish. But if everyone who vilifies people who practice Judaism were to accept this Occam's Razor of an argument, then it wouldn't comport with their conspiracy theories and render Life as we know it a much more random event. And we humans sure like to think we're in control of our lives.

I'm politically, socially, and religiously a Conservative Jew who served a tour in the Marines, raised a family, owns a small manufacturing business, and likes the freedom of owning guns and a country that allows freedom of speech (moreso than most other countries)--even if it's speech I find odious and ignorant.

ZH is a very informative website in regards to macro-economics and has given me the opportunity to learn a lot from a variety of people, even those who believe my very existence is an afront to them. 

Unfortunately, if you want a conversation with an oligarch, you'll have to find a way to get them to respond to you.


Pseudolus's picture

Why is the USA pushing for war with Russia and China? Because they offer the only resistance left to the Banker elites and Zionism.

Even if theyre not on board the Zionist train, who could rightly consider that these two countries offer much in way of an attractive or workable alternative model.

I understand this resistance, at this point in proceedings, as their being busy negotiating terms as they address external pressures aimed at dismantling their empires - by attrition and/or absorption.

After summer intermission, I think the fifth act starts. 

Flying Wombat's picture

Tusk's sin is worse than a Faustian bargain.  I'd argue that he and a great many of our so-called leaders really believe in the crap they do and would do it even if it wasn't rewarding, financially. 

Counterpunch's picture
Counterpunch (not verified) Flying Wombat Jun 8, 2015 10:26 PM

some men really do just want to watch the world burn.

JR's picture

“Lies have shorter and shorter legs. Two months after the change of regime in Kiev, the Polish press has disclosed the role of Donald Tusk’s government in preparing the coup.”

That’s from Voltaire Net, April 22, 2014.

VWAndy's picture

There are other possibilities.

squid's picture

This was a good read.



Cabreado's picture

"Those involved will not be swayed from their individual or collective objectives (consider Adolf Hitler or Josef Stalin)."

There are no Hitlers or Stalins this round.
There are Entitled, loosely associated, conveniently enabled by a multitude of circumstances, unchecked criminal influence in a context of false money at the top of the pile.

"The best that can be done is to work at placing ourselves as far outside of their sphere of influence as possible."

That's a timid (and useless, and suicidal) conclusion.
The sphere of influence IS the society in which we live, and we see it spiraling down. We must accept that, and squelch the forces of Control. Yes, there is still time to do it peacefully. But no time left for timidity.

suteibu's picture

Yes.  The idea that if we just get out of the way, they will eventually eat their own and things will get better disregards the death of a thousand cuts the society has been subjected to since the beginning of the 20th century.  Better to fight it now than hand a crap world down to our children and grandchildren.

sleigher's picture

"Better to fight it now than hand a crap world down to our children and grandchildren."


Tell that to our grand parents.

JR's picture

Globalization is all about world control. It is about getting the nations addicted and dependent on fiat currency and then managing them for the benefit of the looters.

The money manipulators are using the political frames of the Fed, the IMF and World Bank to loot the resources of the world and turn America and the EU into a global empire.

The Fed, the ECB, the IMF, and the World Bank, are one.

Stable value behind a currency as a medium of exchange  is what formerly kept us free and gave Americans the incentive to produce. It protected property rights. It’s what gives other nations a chance to be free.

Anyone who possesses wealth in a country without any control in the Government will lose it. Case in point: savers.

Gian Lorenzo Bernini wrote in the 17th century:

“Two days after the death of my father, although I, Lorenzo, was very young, being only in my twenty-first year, the principal men of the city and the State came to our house to condole on our loss and encourage me to take on myself the care of the City and the State, as my father and grandfather had done. This proposal being contrary to the instincts of my youthful age, and considering that the burden and danger were great, I consented unwillingly. But I did so to protect our friends and our property, for it fares ill in Florence with anyone who possesses great wealth without any control in the Government.”

Counterpunch's picture
Counterpunch (not verified) Jun 8, 2015 10:04 PM

This presupposes one group of elites.  But there are likely multiple, somewhat overlapping centers of power.

Bankers have tremendous power, but how many divisions do they have?

In a simple sense, "globalists" is a deceptive term - as if its one group with shared goals.

Do the Bushes and Rockerfellers really have the same goals as the Rothschilds and Lazars?

How much is simply capitalists - destroying cultures and national sovereignty to continue extracting profit?  Capitalism may seem much better than the alternatives, but power corrupts, no matter what system it is engendered by.

suteibu's picture

On the other hand, enough seem to agree on such things as the TPP which sets up a regional supranational bureaucracy likely to set about the process of stripping nations of their sovereignty.  Even if the globalists fight among themselves after the fact, people still have to live with the results.  Has any modern government ever repealed freedom stripping laws?

Counterpunch's picture
Counterpunch (not verified) suteibu Jun 8, 2015 10:25 PM

Solid point. 

The WASPs may wish to read their Torah to get a sense of Judaic, hence Zionist eschatology.

As with the violence in the Koran, its not the case that most adherents take it literally, but if a critical mass of fundies do...  its a problem for everyone else in Mid-gaard.

Uber Vandal's picture

I have a feeling that Crazy Horse, Sitting Bull, and multitudes of others are in the Happy Hunting Grounds laughing their asses off at us about the treaties our "Tribal Elders" are about to sign.......

q99x2's picture
Dissent Among the Ranks

Yep. Can anyone imagine the NWO letting the Clintons into the bunkers when the nukes go off. Hell no.

malek's picture

 Trouble is, the same sociopathology would drive the same individuals to seek to dominate each other.

Very poor counter-argument! When these few individuals have successfully subjugated everybody else, then they will start fighting against each other.

I fail to see how no in-fighting proves they are *not* trying to subjugate everybody else...

Trogdor's picture

Agreed - we are the "enemy of my enemy" at this point in their eyes.  They may have "plans" for their own dominance within their ranks, but they will destroy much of humanity in their fucked-up pursuit of World dominance before they get to the point of trying to take each other out.

amanfromMars's picture

The best that can be done is to work at placing ourselves as far outside of their sphere of influence as possible

Methinks the placing of oneself in the opposite position is the best that one can do, and such .... a smarter advanced intelligent being at the centre inside spheres of influence ...... can really have an influence and impact upon future promotions/programmes and which when subversive, corrupt and/or perverted are morphs/clones/drones easily capable of enabling the fcuking up of systems.

Yen Cross's picture

 When in doubt, always have a 3'rd vote.



From the medieval legend of Faust, who made a contract with the devil, exchanging his soul for worldly gains.

GRDguy's picture

From the 1889 book The Great Red Dragon, Introduction: ... their goal is to own the earth in fee-simple."  Today, some of the financial sociopathic organizations gave examples:

Where did the original title from for all of these homes, as they were not rental property to being with.  Rhetorical question to think about.  

Cerberus; what a name for a company headed up by none other than Dan Quayle, ex-vp with ol' Bush.