MONOLOGUE WRITTEN BY CLYDE LEWIS
This morning I did my usual routine of getting up and doing the morning rituals. I then picked up my phone and looked over Facebook, a few news sites and listened to last night’s show on Sound Cloud – sometimes I like to review just to see how things sound.
I also like to look at the comments to see what people think or if they have new ideas to share and then I get the comments that are most aggravating.
Comments like: “I used to like listening to your show but obviously you are pro Trump and not balanced at all. I am now going to stop listening.” When you respond to it – you feel like the guy who steps in dog poop and realizes that no matter how hard he tries cleaning it up there will still be residual poop on the shoe.
You never can calm these people down – they are relentless –even complaining about them will make others like them go “Aha! I knew he is a racist Trump supporter!”
The obvious thing is that anymore you can’t just expose a conspiracy and leave it at that.
You have to be told that your conspiracy leans left or right and it is such a chore to tell people that there are bigger things that confront us that have no respect for your feelings and whether or not your political party is going to win – it is simple common sense.
For example, while the media is still beside itself over the Mueller testimony and while the sensitive are unfriending those they don’t agree with on social media, Earth had a close call today.
Asteroid 2019 OK, estimated to be between 187 feet and 427 feet in diameter, came within 43,500 miles of striking the Earth — closer than the moon.
The asteroid was flying towards us from the direction of the sun, making it hard to spot. It was only first seen a few days ago, and was only confirmed to be an asteroid in the past day.
43,500 miles depending on the trajectory and if it would have hit us, it would have been pretty close to being a global killer—something that big moving 15 miles a second is pretty much a close shave with apocalyptic death.
And yet the most important message I get today is from someone who is going to stop listening to my show because she thinks I am a Trump supporter.
I often say to people who send me these messages “Would it help if I said that Trump sucks?”
As you can probably already guess, there are more important things happening and the media has been able to keep us at the “pick a side” argument for everything.
I would hope that people who listen to my show think bigger than this.
I am becoming very suspicious of people who overreact to ordinary activities. It is also worse when the overreaction includes some sort of political connection and then it becomes even more suspicious.
I personally have been told where I stand politically and believe it or not you would never guess which side complains the most.
I have just about had enough with the public freakouts and assumed identities that people want to think they cling to.
These overreactions I am sure are being noted by algorithms and data miners in order to find our vulnerabilities. The extremist overreactions to things are both unwise and damaging to our culture.
That is why I have always wanted to be seen as the adversarial press or a media that brings up adversarial views that certainly put unwise overreactions in check. The model is simply brought up the worst-case scenario as a warning and that way when the hammer goes down on every nail – people will not overreact – they will know that this is how the world is changing.
The political climate is toxic and there are many people who are fueling the toxicity thinking that it is their duty to malign those who are on what they think is “the opposing side.”
I want to make it clear that unmodulated shock and outrage over everything can burn what little credibility the political parties have stated they possess. I have said before that much of the political and social climate in this country seems to be on its way to rock bottom. Mark my words it will eventually exhaust the American public and increase the already staggering amount of cynicism paralyzing our national political life.
This will open the door for destructive philosophies that we once thought were neutralized in the past –but creep in like medieval diseases that plague the market place.
Much of this overactive attitude I believe is rooted in the public’s tragic ignorance of civics and government.
The media tends to feed off the worries of younger Americans. The mainstream narrative plays off of the radical ideologies of extremist views. If average Americans question these actions—there is an overreaction rather than a moment to explain.
The truth is like it or not this new extremism is the future of our world. It will be the call and action for the New World Order.
Those who are old enough to see this will eventually be rendered irrelevant. They are already being called Nazis and Fascists and they are already under the watchful eye of ridicule.
The truth is that younger Americans really have no firm memory of any president taking office other than Barack Obama, and it’s unlikely that they were overly concerned with the statutory membership of the National Security Council eight years ago.
Even citizens who remember earlier transitions would have to go back to the chaos of the 2000 election to recall a more divisive transfer of power.
Back then I was suspicious of the Bush/Gore transition but it never came to this toxic overreaction and this deep polarization.
The media seems to despise Trump more than any president in modern history, even Richard Nixon. When I was a kid –my conservative family started to bad mouth Richard Nixon –even my conservative neighbors did –but the republic was untouchable and all differences could be given without radical overreaction.
Trump, for his part, clearly revels in bad-mouthing those who bad mouth him and feeds it daily with taunting tweets and incendiary official statements that he knows will make the news.
As a result, too many in the media are inclined to take every action by Trump as a declaration of war, presenting almost everything as unprecedented or unconstitutional or some other alarming adjective.
This is not only tiring but embarrassing and those that take sport in participating don’t even realize that they are losing any and all integrity they once possessed.
This continual panic and freak out is short-circuiting any reasonable debate about the real future of our Republic –and I must say that while we are continuously on edge – those who are plotting our republic’s demise are hard at work preparing a new form of government that will promise to unite everyone both spiritually and politically.
I want to assure you that none of these individuals plotting the future world government are on TV claiming to be the new Trump nightmare and it isn’t even the conservative extremists that hyperventilate on Fox News.
You see, a continual state of political panic certainly thwarts progress and it is numbing people to the real threats that are now looming and will inevitably arise.
A new corporate and government marriage quietly took place last week when the leadership of the World Economic Forum and the United Nations signed a memorandum of understanding to partner with each other.
This move gives multinational corporations influence over matters of global governance.
It is important to note that the timing and managing of public perceptions were crucial in seeing this thing through as it is yet another step in establishing a New World Order.
In 2009, the World Economic Forum published a 600-page report entitled the Global Redesign Initiative, which called for a new system of global governing, one in which the decisions of governments could be made secondary to multistakeholder led initiatives in which corporations would play a defining role.
In a sense, this World Economic Forum study recommended a sort of public-private United “Nations” – something that has now been formalized in this memorandum of understanding. The agreement announces new multistakeholder partnerships to deliver public goods in the fields of education, women, financing, Climate Change, and health.
Under Climate Change which is literally World Sustainable Development, it calls for ‘public commitments from the private sector to reach carbon neutrality by 2050’, not actions that result in carbon neutrality by 2030. Under education, it re-defines the Sustainable Development education goal to ‘ensure inclusive and equitable quality education’ into one that focuses on education to meet the ‘rapidly changing world of work.”
It avoids any commitment to reduce global inequality, to make energy affordable, to hold multinational corporations accountable for human rights violations, or even to rein in the behavior of the World Economic Forum’s firms that act inconsistently to the re-defined goals set out in the agreement.
Bottom line it is an outline for the fascist world government that will be established in order to reign in political extremists and privatizes necessities. This way they can sidestep those who disagree with their one-world plan of government that they wish to establish in 2030.
This agreement circumvents the intergovernmental review process; the agreement elevates multistakeholderism as the solution to the problems with the current multilateral system, and thirdly, the proposed multistakeholder partnerships are not governed by any formal democratic system.
Were the Secretary-General convinced of the wisdom of a UN marriage with the World Economic Forum, he could have submitted the draft Memo of understanding for approval by the member states. Instead, the Secretary-General joined the World Economic Forum in declaring in effect that multistakeholder groups without any formal intergovernmental oversight are a better governance system than a one-country-one-vote system.
What is surprising is that by accepting this marriage arrangement with the World Economic Forum, the Secretary-General of the UN is marginalizing the intergovernmental system in order to move us closer to what can be called the New World Order.
The merger is official –and the power it will have will be immense.
However, most Americans will not be aware of this move because President Trump has fought against it and most of his adversaries will agree with it as they are proposing platforms with green new deal policies in line with U.N. Agenda 2030.
This is no longer a matter of Red State/Blue State – this is a matter of the state and how government will be contained in the future.
I am learning that this is not limited to just government but religion is also being contained in the world order.
Pope Francis has now appealed for world government to promote his agenda. Pope Francis has stated that he supports the Earth Charter and the provisions laid out during the 2030 Summit of Sustainability.
The Earth Charter presents itself as “an ethical framework for building a just, sustainable, and peaceful global society in the 21st century.
However, the Earth Charter comprises a comprehensive network of global ethics and a political blueprint for world government. The Earth Charter was initiated by Mikhail Gorbachev, former leader of the Soviet Union, and Maurice Strong, head of the UN’s Rio Sustainable Development Summit, Summit 2030 and Chairman of the Earth Council.
The Earth Charter commands global governance as defined by the United Nations Commission on Global Governance and other UN commissions. “In order to build a sustainable global community, the nations of the world must renew their commitment to the United Nations, fulfill their obligations under existing international agreements, and support the implementation of Earth Charter principles with an international legally binding instrument on environment and development.”
Pope Francis spoke of the need for secular powers to establish global control over areas including finance under the pretext of environmental disaster:
“We are living in a time of crisis; we see it in the environment, but above all, we see it in men and women. The human person is in danger: this much is certain the human person is in danger today, hence the urgent need for human ecology! And the peril is grave, because the cause of the problem is not superficial but deeply rooted. It is not merely a question of economics but of ethics and anthropology.
The Church has frequently stressed this; and many are saying: yes, it is right, it is true but the system continues unchanged since what dominates are the dynamics of an economy and finance that are lacking in ethics. It is no longer man who commands, but money, money, cash commands.
Control of civil law and law among European nations is what the Catholic Church thrived on through the Middle Ages. This control was the primary underpinning of her power during the six hundred years of the Inquisition and in the growth of her religious power system generally throughout the centuries.
Now we see that Rome exploits civil power to suppress the Gospel and to advance the agenda of a world order and ecumenical church.
In an address to nearly 150 Christian leaders from around the world on Pope Francis called for a “new ecumenical spring” to redefine efforts towards unity – one marked not by tailoring the faith to “worldly ways of thinking,” but rather, one made possible by an attractive witness to the joy of the Gospel.
Pope Francis has reminded the faithful that “Ecumenism is not something optional.”
In other words, you have no choice.
You can call it apostate if you wish but soon all religions will be put under one big umbrella and will be ruled by a world authority similar to a “new Roman empire.”
Back in February, you may remember that the Pope and the Grand Imam of al-Azhar signed a historic declaration of fraternity, calling for peace between nations, religions, and races.
The historic signing took place in front of a global audience of religious leaders from Christianity, Islam, Judaism, and other faiths.
The document pledges that al-Azhar and the Vatican will work together to fight extremism. Claiming to be in the name of “all victims of wars, persecution, and injustice”, it warns against a “third world war being fought piecemeal.”
It says: “We resolutely declare that religions must never incite war, hateful attitudes, hostility and extremism, nor must they incite violence or the shedding of blood.”
There was a concerted effort to make sure that all of the religions of the world were represented at this gathering.
According to the official Vatican website, a tremendous amount of preparation went into the drafting of this document, and it encourages believers from all religions “to shake hands, embrace one another, kiss one another, and even pray with one another.
In the document God and Allah are interchangeable – and it speaks of peace between all faiths.
In the document, it says that:
“Freedom is a right of every person: each individual enjoys the freedom of belief, thought, expression and action. The pluralism and the diversity of religions, color, sex, race, and language are willed by God in His wisdom, through which He created human beings. This divine wisdom is the source from which the right to freedom of belief and the freedom to be different derives. Therefore, the fact that people are forced to adhere to a certain religion or culture must be rejected, as too the imposition of a cultural way of life that others do not accept.”
In essence, this is saying that it is the will of God that there are hundreds of different religions in the world and that they are all acceptable in His sight.
We know that the elite wants a one-world religion, but to see the most important clerics from both Catholicism and Islam make such a dramatic public push for ecumenical agreement – I always thought that this would be a sign that the world is preparing for a United Imperial cult.
The United Imperial cult is supposed to be ruled by a committee of disciples that answer to the Antichrist.
Some critics are even calling this the creation of “Chrislam.”
What is obvious is that all of the petty arguments we have over Republican and Democrat will not matter in the near future. It’s extremism that moves us closer to a New World Order to will increase.
Extremists will endeavor to overcome the existing state and social order by replacing democracy with a communist or an anarchist system. To this end, they participate in social protests, trying to instrumentalize them for their purposes. Their forms of action range from open agitation to clandestine, partly serious acts of violence, with isolated autonomous groups also accepting individuals being injured.
There is a false notion in our national conversation right now that you have to choose between mushy calls for civility and standing up for “truth and justice.” This misunderstands the nature of polarization, and it misunderstands the multi-faceted fight for actual truth and justice.
Society is fragmenting into two increasingly irreconcilable teams and as it gets worse there will be solutions provided by outside bodies that wish to offer the globalist road for peace among the people.
Consider that 20 percent of Democrats and 15 percent of Republicans said recently that they sometimes feel like the country would be better off if large numbers of members of the other party simply died. Consider that the Fund for Peace ranks the United States as having the worst trending social cohesion indicators of any country in the world over the past five years. Consider that the research shows that our divides are increasingly about our identities (who we are) and less and less about our ideologies (what we believe).
We can negotiate with the other side about what we believe. We can’t negotiate about who we are especially when U.N. Troops are called in to quell a civil war started by political suspicion.
This is a setup and many of you are playing along.
Polarization should worry us, not because it might lead to people not being nice to each other when they argue politics, but because it might lead to our country fracturing irreparably.
Our choice isn’t between civility and justice. Our choice is whether we are going to allow our country to fracture beyond repair. If we do, truth and justice won’t be the winners.