-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~> <FONT COLOR="#000099">eLerts It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free! </FONT><A HREF="http://click.egroups.com/1/9068/6/_/1406/_/970160934/"><B>Click Here!</B></A> ---------------------------------------------------------------------_-> by Brett Daniel Wills founder/editor-in-chief [EMAIL PROTECTED] ******************************************************* e-venthorizon.net is a free online magazine covering trends and obstacles toward the establishment of a global government; international political analysis and socio-cultural issues; a comprehensive political research resource directory; book and film reviews; and literary work from contemporary writers throughout the world. ******************************************************* CONTENDERS FOR THE CROWN: How the United Nations, European Union and Other Powers Are Vying For the Political Plateau by Brett Daniel Wills 8:00 a.m. October 1, 2000 PDT "The march of God in the world, that is what the State is." - Hegel Though the United Nations has long been seen by conspiracy theorists and students of eschatology as the initial draft of a ground-floor design upon which a single, comprehensive framework for global unification could rest, the Post-Cold War world began to generate alternative institutions. At present there are three specific entities acting overtly as mere fortifications to UN agendas and policies, while subtly imposing their influences on the UN like wind-fronts lashing at its sails to redirect its path toward their own shores. These are: Transnational corporate networks, working to knit a global oligarchy of banking families, pressuring the UN via monetary manipulation of market economies and fiscal coercion of legislative bodies. The Islamic Alliance, working to establish a global theocratic dictatorship, influencing the UN via diplomatic pressures and voting power in the General Assembly. The EU/NATO, working to forge a global monarchy with social-democratic undertones, influencing the UN via military integration and cooperation with peacekeeping missions. A Frontrunner Emerges Though it can be argued that the Vatican and the United States are two more contenders for the prize, these two, while increasing in power and persuasion since the collapse of Communism in 1991, have subsequently sustained a decade-long decline in influence over the UN, estranged by its demands for increased financing, expanded authority, and contrary ethical standards such as the right to abortion. As such, for now, they have been relegated — be it by choice or circumstance — to the backburners of consideration for the coveted crown. Meanwhile, the three contenders aforementioned increase their aggression, tearing at the UN like a pack of wolves dissecting their half-dead prey. Though the arrival of more aspirants may alter the geopolitical landscape in factoring end-game tactics, the current favorite among the triumvirate is the EU/NATO. As the oldest of the pack and the only one to claim previous title ownership as the Roman Empire, it is credited with the most skill and experience. Strategically vying for position, NATO has been gradually emancipating itself from U.S. participation and oversight; when the organization finalizes the severance, it will then be redefined as the EU's military branch, and the union itself renamed the United States of Europe (USE), placing it in a solid position to overtake the UN as the premier world power. The U.S. — a Sixth World Power? On a technical level, it should be acknowledged that the current reign of the U.S. as the globe's single Superpower — now entering its 9th year — is, indeed, an accomplishment unrivaled for two millennia. By definition, this distinction does not elevate America to a status of world dominion commiserate with historical examples. However, consider its stunning record of world influence over the last half of the 20th century in light of the relative brevity of its age — at a paltry 2-1/4 centuries of development, it is no more than a preschooler compared to an average national life span of over twenty centuries, with some extending beyond forty. To grasp the extent of such a phenomenal feat, imagine a five year old accomplishing more in his last year than an elder's entire lifetime of achievements. >From this vantage point, the U.S. may well indeed fill the role of the sixth nation to command world control — albeit by a new definition. Furthermore, if the U.S. continues to hold its place for the foreseeable future, establishing itself well into the 22nd and 23rd centuries, it will be (if not already) acknowledged as the greatest nation of all time. Even so, with America's past indisputably dominant on most fronts, its latest scorecard, a far less impressive record, may hint of the twilight of its success and the gradual yielding of prominence to either the European Union and/or the United Nations. With conflicting data obscuring analyses to determine if the U.S. has experienced an overall expansion or decline in global power during the last decade, it is safe to conclude that no significant change in power has occurred. Though it can be argued that the U.S. economy has greatly expanded, even acquiring unprecedented wealth, its military power has weakened. While undergoing great strides in technological refinement and prowess, the armed forces have also endured a consistent reduction in budget allocations, bases, troops, weaponry and, most importantly, morale; while simultaneously facing a more volatile world with an array of evasive opponents given to fluctuating causes replacing a single, tangible, constant Soviet threat. The counterclaim that a smaller, leaner, more advanced force is ideal, while essentially true on the surface, refuses to take into account the rapid attrition in war readiness capability, attributable to the following two trends which, if not curbed, will remove the American military from its perch of global superiority: A continual drain on military personal scattered abroad in increasing numbers of deployments to enforce UN peacekeeping missions. Military budget cuts that have prevented critical hardware upgrades, forcing strenuous usage of overextended parts and machinery, increasing chances of equipment malfunctions during combat, placing in jeopardy the ability win two wars simultaneously, without which, the Pentagon and defense academicians insist, the U.S. cannot sustain a viable self defense in the Post-Cold war era. Whereas the U.S. has exercised restraint against repeated pressures to extend its foreign policy dictates, shunning the role of 'world policeman,' all five former purveyors of world order pursued just the opposite, forcing regional submission. Indeed, each consecutive empire evinced a more oppressive nature and accomplished a greater depth of dominion than its predecessor, with the exception of Rome, which, while the most formidable in crushing resistance, utilized diplomacy over force wherever applicable. Therefore, if the U.S. must follow historic precedents as qualifying criteria to gain recognition as the sixth world government, it would have to exceed the iron control of the ancient Roman Empire. If the only criteria required is that a nation or entity gain the greatest collective status among the international community, then the U.S. stands alone. For in its position of authority, it has compelled admiration and imitation among the nations, so as to effectively rule over them not by force but by persuasion. This attribute, it can be argued, is a sign of even greater strength, as less effort is exerted to achieve equal results. Thus, as the diplomatic civility of pax Romana achieved equal or greater results than the lesser means of Persian or Babylonian conquests by brute force alone, so the U.S. has established an even more remarkable record of influence than it's Italian predecessor. Of the previous five junctures in history that established world order, America would stand alone in most effectively exacting conformity via diplomacy and other non-forceful measures. Duration of rule is another historical factor to consider — all, save the first, having reigned for considerable periods of time. Yet because the chronological order of the previous five powers doesn't reveal an extending timeframe, longevity of rule need not be weighed into present considerations. ******************************************************* To receive a free subscription of our e-newsletter, visit: www.e-venthorizon.net *******************************************************
