Here Come the Black Helicopters!

attention to what is unfolding. Because of that, this scary scheme is advancing in stealth. Perhaps the media have not connected the dots. This massive power grab by the United Nations is scarcely attracting any comment, much less any opposition. Yet the threat is imminent and immediate.

This book will connect the dots. It will spell out the carefully choreographed plan to empower the unelected, undemocratic, unaccountable United Nations as the director of the new global governance.

The blueprint for this was drawn many years ago and it is only recently that the socialists’ dream has come close to fruition.

For all of us, it is urgent that we act now.

Before it’s too late.

Because, right now, right in front of us, there is a frightening worldwide movement—spearheaded by liberals, socialists, globalists, and radical environmentalists. They want to dominate us globally by seriously limiting our freedom, forcibly changing our lifestyles, emasculating our democratic institutions, redistributing our wealth, assets, and technology to poorer countries, and subjecting us to an international rule of law imposed by the United Nations.

A rule of law that will be directed by faceless and unaccountable bureaucrats.

A rule of law that is antithetical to our representative system of government.

A rule of law that is based on a socialist philosophy.

A rule of law that stems from an anti-American bias.

A rule of law that we cannot tolerate.

In short, these globalists and socialists want to reorganize the world into an easily managed and cohesive group of nations who willingly cede their sovereignty to a series of international organizations associated with the United Nations. That is exactly what they intend to do.

And it’s just around the corner. So is the end of freedom if they succeed.

Global governance, at its core, is a process of decision making that is intended to systematically undermine the sovereignty and authority of productive and successful nations like the United States and Japan. That’s what it’s all about.

The central organizing tool for the imposition of one-world global governance has been the worldwide environmental movement to overcome the assumed dangers of climate change.

Whether you subscribe to the existence of global warming and the need to protect the planet is not relevant to this threat. Nor is the issue of whether climate change is man-made. Those are not the issues today. What is the issue is that, since its inception, many of the most important leaders of the planetary global warming movement have capitalized on widespread fear of the consequences of global warming (fears that, for the most part, were created by them) to systematically and aggressively advance their goal of global governance and scare people into believing their new international system is the only hope for the future of the planet.

Advancing in the name of environmentalism, social justice, and sustainability, the globalists and socialists —who run the United Nations—are proceeding apace with their far-reaching game plan to end national sovereignty and subsume all nations under global governance. Focusing on what they have identified as “planetary” environmental problems, such as climate change and ocean acidification, they are determined to implement an agenda of socialist central planning to curb the power of democratic electorates and the sovereignty of nation- states, and force them into a global regulatory scheme.

Their stated goals are to reverse climate change, reduce carbon emissions, increase living standards in the impoverished Southern Hemisphere, and make development sustainable in an era of limited and diminishing natural resources.

But it’s a mask.

However much the globalists believe in environmental reforms, their real goal is to establish a one-world government—dominated by self-selected elites—that will preempt nations and their electorates and force them to abide by regulations promulgated by rulers over whom they have no say or control. Just as Karl Marx called for a global government of the working class, so they want one of economists, social scientists, environmentalists, and other self-chosen quasi-academic elites. Just as Marx used the poverty of the labor force in nineteenth-century capitalism as his touchstone in formulating his plans, so they use the supposed threats to the global environment as theirs.

Broadly, there are two political philosophy camps in the world: those who believe in free markets and individual liberty and those who believe in central planning and dictation from above. The believers in freedom root their conviction that free people, free markets, and free competition will steer the world in the right direction, with public education substituting for central planning and direction. To the freedom advocates, it is through economic and political freedom that progress is possible. To the top-down globalists and planners, it is an impediment that gets in the way of wiser heads directing the planet.

The apostle of economic and political liberty, Friedrich Hayek, described in his famous work, The Road to Serfdom, at the end of World War II a dichotomy in which he lumped communism, socialism, fascism, and Nazism together as the opponents of liberal democratic freedom. His contrast between planning and competition, centralization and freedom, were valid then and are even more so today.

As Hayek put it, “We have seen before how the separation of economic and political aims is an essential guarantee of individual freedom and how it is consequently attacked by all collectivists. To this we must now add the ‘substitution of political for economic power’ now so often demanded means necessarily the substitution of power from which there is no escape for power which is always limited.”¹⁷

Hayek was prescient in foreseeing the result of collectivism, planning, and total political power: “What is called economic power, while it can be an instrument of coercion, is, in the hands of private individuals, never exclusive or complete power, never power over the whole life of a person. But centralized as an instrument of political power, it creates a degree of dependence scarcely distinguishable from slavery.”¹⁸

Hayek predicted that the forces of tyranny would advance by wrapping their lust for power in a sacred cause. Citing the requisites of that objective, they would insist that all conform to their plans to advance it, overriding individual choice and market economics.

This is exactly what has happened in the global governance movement. The push for a one-world order has been wrapped around saving the planet from the effects of global warming.

To some, the objective of central planning was national honor and military victory. Others, justified totalitarian rule by saying it aimed for the global victory of the working class (but it became increasingly evident that the objectives were traditional imperialism and the expansion of national power).

The modern-day globalists and greens use the cause of reversing climate change and “saving” our planetary environment as their justification for global planning and control.

But their objective, too, is quite clear: global control and power. And just like their forebears, their real enemy is not climate change or carbon emissions but the liberal, free market democracies and the rule of sovereign electorates. Like them, they must organize all in the name of their cause to make democratic rule irrelevant and obsolete.

Hayek specifically warns about such prophets:

The movement for planning owes its present strength largely to the fact that… it unites almost all the single minded idealists, all the men and women who have devoted their lives to a single task. The hopes they place in planning, however, are the result… of great exaggeration of the importance of the ends they place foremost…. From the saintly and single minded idealist to the fanatic is often but a single step. It is the resentment of the frustrated specialist which gives the demand for planning its strongest impetus. There could hardly be a more unbearable and more irrational world than one in which the most eminent specialists in each field were allowed to proceed unchecked with the realization of their ideals.¹⁹

Hayek’s description fits today’s radical environmentalists to a T. Obsessed by their conviction that the planet is coming to an end, they insist that all nations, states, localities, communities, families, and people submit to a discipline they would impose on every aspect of their lives in order to save us from destruction. But what they end up doing is canceling out both free will for the individual and democratic determination of policies for the nation. Only their fetish has priority. Nothing else matters. All must fall in line behind their plan for the world.

Our modern-day globalists/socialists/radical environmentalists have laid out a program of worldwide change