The United States has been the dominating power on the world stage for a long time, but what happens when two or more accompany our party?
In 2008, the Department of National Intelligence predicted that by the year 2025, we will live in a multipolar world.
Multipolar World Order
Polarity in international relations is any of the various ways in which power is distributed within the international system. It describes the nature of the international system at any given period of time. One generally distinguishes four types of systems: unipolarity, bipolarity, tripolarity, and multipolarity for four or more centers of power. The type of system is completely dependent on the distribution of power and influence of states in a region or globally.
It is widely believed amongst theorists in international relations that the post-Cold War international system is unipolar: The United States’ defense spending is “close to half of global military expenditures; a blue-water navy superior to all others combined; a chance at a powerful nuclear first strike over its erstwhile foe, Russia; a defense research and development budget that is 80 percent of the total defense expenditures of its most obvious future competitor, China; and unmatched global power-projection capabilities.
For the last several decades, the United States of total dominance has in large part enormously controlled the theater of geopolitics because of our weaponry, military, intelligence, influence, power, and so on. However, over the course of the last several years, actors have diluted the strength of the United States with the sole purpose of creating an international multipolar world order.
The rise of China, Russia, Iran, India, and others have fomented a crisis on the world stage, should the USA relinquish and distribute its power to these other nations the system of unipolarity, evidenced by US dominance after the end of the Cold War, would end. Flashback to the Clinton era and so begins the throttled rise of communist China.
In 1996 the FBI made an official inquiry into Chinese attempts to influence U.S. policy because the Federal Bureau of Investigations intercepted communications from the US Embassy and the Beijing government that China wanted to influence the election by supporting Democrats and Bill Clinton to help advance China.
While questions regarding the U.S. Democratic Party’s fund-raising activities first arose over a Los Angeles Times article published on September 21, 1996, China’s alleged role in the affair first gained public attention when Bob Woodward and Brian Duffy of The Washington Post published a story stating that a United States Department of Justice investigation into the fund-raising activities had uncovered evidence that agents of China sought to direct contributions from foreign sources to the Democratic National Committee (DNC) before the 1996 presidential campaign.
The journalists wrote that intelligence information had shown the Chinese embassy in Washington, D.C. was used for coordinating contributions to the DNC in violation of United States law forbidding non-American citizens or non-permanent residents from giving monetary donations to United States politicians and political parties. A Republican investigator of the controversy stated the Chinese plan targeted both presidential and congressional United States elections, while Democratic Senators said the evidence showed the Chinese targeted only congressional elections. The government of the People’s Republic of China denied all accusations. —Wiki
Regardless of the fact that Clinton was indirectly busted for accepting financial contributions directly from China, Clinton would go on to win the election of 1996 and so began the rise of bipolarity. Now, fast forward a few years, and in 2018 China’s economy is expected to overtake that of the US’s economy.
The fall of the Soviet Union and the decline of Russian power has been revived under Putin’s rule. Russia, once a disbanded nation, is increasing in military strength, and economic influence, however, they are still ranked 12th in economic size, with China, India, and Brazil well ahead of the former Soviet Union. Regardless, Russia is still a significant threat to the bipolar system, and with that comes the alliance of China and Russia.
Chinese and Russian relations are at an all-time high, the two nations are indirectly directly working to usurp US global dominance. With China working for power economically and institutionally, Russia is politically and militarily becoming more assertive, and thus the US slaps on sanctions to deter the rise of Russia.
Enter, Donald Trump. Trump blazed the political scene promoting ‘Americanism’ and return to the resurgence of US economic growth, and military dominance. As President Trump encouraged such, the world viewed America as though we are returning to a protectionist standpoint. Thus Xi Jinping, the President of China, claimed that the communist nation would replace the US on the global stage if the US backs out of global agreements.
With China gunning for the ‘top spot,’ it is evident that the Far East wants to reshape the global economic model and create one that is not based on Oil and Fossil Fuels but rather ‘Green Energy,’ in addition to several other factors. Through the acceptance of climate change as a wide-ranging fact on the world stage, the IMF and other organizations can create an entirely new global economic model.
In the creation of this new economic model, one that is not based on equal opportunity, but rather one that is based on equal outcome. Several different propositions have been proposed in recent months such as, UBI, universal basic income, meaning that each individual would receive the same benefits rather than work for their wages. The problematic scenario is self-explanatory, in that, wealthy organizations would devise the amount given to the ‘lower class,’ thus creating a global welfare state in each nation-state.
How credible is this economic outcome? So credible that in a recent DAVOS publication, they made the prediction that in the year 2030 most civilians, ‘lower class,’ would not own anything, have no privacy, and live off of the government entirely. Such a system is a regurgitation of the economic models proposed under communism and socialism combined, and the consequences would be just as severe.
It is increasingly evident that the new structure, the global elites are proposing is one that in large part is again based on communism and socialism, and is one that directly contradicts the current model. However, with the UN and several other countries increasingly leaning towards socialist and communist tendencies, it is evident that from the current trend, the outcome derived would be one based on the 19th-century political models except for one large addition, technology.
Technology has the ability to replace the current worker, and according to a recent interview with Bryan Johnson, the founder of Braintree and the CEO of Kernal, the practicality of technology mingling with mankind is dependent upon the law, meaning that they have the technology, but rules and regulations are keeping them at bay. With the adoption of certain technologies, a nation-state could effectively begin to roll out certain technologies that replace the average worker, monitor the populace, mingle man with machine, and so on.
The problem of the socialistic-communistic models of old, was always that the working class would eventually revolt because the cost of living became to high while the wages remained low, enter technology, and there is no need for the working class. The system the elites are building has a name and its called technocracy.
A technocracy replaces elected politicians with technocrats, non-elected officials, or scientists and engineers, who have ‘the technical expertise to manage the economy.’
Technocracy – publication from 1938 Technocracy Inc.
‘Technocracy is the science of social engineering, the scientific operation of the entire social mechanism to produce and distribute goods and services to the entire population of this continent. For the first time in human history it will be done as a scientific, technical, engineering problem. There will be no place for Politics or Politicians, Finance or Financiers, Rackets or Racketeers. Technocracy states that this method of operating the social mechanism of the North American Continent is now mandatory because we have passed from a state of actual scarcity into the present status of potential abundance in which we are now held to an artificial scarcity forced upon us in order to continue a Price System which can distribute goods only by means of a medium of exchange. Technocracy states that price and abundance are incompatible; the greater the abundance the smaller the price. In a real abundance there can be no price at all. Only by abandoning the interfering price control and substituting a scientific method of production and distribution can an abundance be achieved. Technocracy will distribute by means of a certificate of distribution available to every citizen from birth to death. The Technate will encompass the entire American Continent from Panama to the North Pole because the natural resources and the natural boundary of this area make it an independent, self-sustaining geographical unit.’ – Wiki
[fvplayer src=”https://player.vimeo.com/external/225437706.hd.mp4?s=3cd6248ff30858bd504b587b6800498a404919ad&profile_id=174″ splash=”https://christianjournal.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Parag-K.jpg” playlist=”https://player.vimeo.com/external/225437842.sd.mp4?s=c12e2e7aeeadc0349d7d1e4e3bd929b564a80b8a&profile_id=165,https://christianjournal.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Parag-K-2.jpg”]
A systemic elite, a technocratic society based solely on scientific data and theories destroys the very essence of freedom enshrined to the United States in the Constitution. The organization responsible for cultivating such an idea in the United States disbanded because their science was wrong, the price system didn’t collapse.
However, a resurgence in science and technology in the 21st century has brought back this ideology in the form of an agenda to bring this system to the world stage, and such a system could come about by an organization bent on socialism such as the United Nations. Is this the political ideology that the global elite will use to bring about the one world economic system? What say you reader?
Nations of the world have long leaned in the direction of socialism with the EU leading the way. For example, Germany, the powerhouse of the EU, is a capitalist society that integrates socialist (communist) programs and social justice mantras. Germany is considered a pillar of Europe and China, a communist nation, is considered a pillar of Asia. In an expected twist at the recent G20 meeting both China and Germany are attempting to usurp the US’s dominance and power by stepping up on the world stage claiming that the US seat is being left vacant because of Donald Trump. Thus marking a foundational shift in geopolitics.
“The strategic character of Chinese-German relations is steadily gaining in importance,” Chinese President Xi Jinping said in an op-ed article published Tuesday in German newspaper Die Welt. The two countries “should intensify cooperation on implementing China’s ‘One Belt, One Road’ and jointly make contributions to the security, stability, and prosperity of neighboring countries.”
With the rapid growth of the Far East, and the allegiance of Germany and China, the unipolar world with the United States leading the way has long been over, rather now, we are witnessing the shift from a bipolar world, with China as the US’s counter part, into a more complex global structure where several economic and military powerhouses are becoming superpowers, and thus the dynamic creates the antagonizing force in-between said nations which can rapidly lead to a destabilization on the world stage. The dynamic global system is the multipolar world order and is the final stage before the communistic New World Order.
By Holman W. Jenkins, Jr.. “China Was Bill Clinton’s Russia.” Wall Street Journal. . (2017): . .
Russian Peace Keeper. “United States Recognized that Russia Is Building a Multi-Polar World Order.” Russian PeaceKeeper. . (2017): . .
Polina Tikhonova. “China, US or Russia: Are We Seeing New Superpower?” Value Walk. . (2016): . .
Mathew Burrows, Roger George. “Is America Ready for a Multipolar World?” The National Interest. . (2016): . .
Peter Harris. “How to Live in A Multipolar World.” The National Interest. . (2016): . .
YAN XUETONG. “From a Unipolar to a Bipolar Superpower System: The Future of the Global Power Dynamic.” Carnegie Endowment. . (2011): . .
Mike Patton. “China's Economy Will Overtake The U.S. In 2018.” Forbes. . (2016): . .
Marc Champion, Peter Martin and Brian Parkin. “China, Germany Step Up as U.S. Retires From World Leadership.” Bloomberg. . (2017): . .