Tough expert

Done Not to hard

done... solved like an "easy"

NWO is fiction by HG Wells who was a science fiction writer.

Wells wrote it in 1938-39, as a reaction to Fascism. The intellectual climate in Britain in those days was
mainly conservative, seeing Facism as a Capitalist answer to Socialism. The conservative PM Chamberlain is a well known exponent of this thoutgh, and assured that it all would end up well in the end - it was not as bad as it looked.

He was wrong of course, but even Chirchill had for some time the same opinion. Anyway, Wells, a socialist, wrote that book as a socialists equivalent of Moore's Utopia.

It was'nt a big successs. Interesting is what happened to the conservative idea's. Well, they did a 180-degrees turn and started to describe fascism as a kin of socialism. Afew years after Wells Hayek, also in Britian, wrote the Roas to Serfdom that can be seen as the start of a more extreme form of Capitalism. It ws also not very popular in the UK but immediately very popular in the US.

No disagreement with what you wrote, MrOoijer, but my question still remains.

I'll quote my own post from June 29th to reiterate:

"One controversial topic I'd actually like to see discussed in this international forum is the concept of the "New World Order" which HGWells in his 1940s book described as a socialist, unified, one-world government. Many have since used the phrase to indicate global governance, some with a positive connotation and some with a negative connotation. How would you define "the new world order" and is that concept something world leaders should strive for ? Why or why not? Debate please, and let's try to keep name-calling and ad-hominem attacks out of the discussion."

If one considers George H.W. Bush's references to the New World Order synonymous with a one-world government, should that concept be something world leaders should pursue ? Should we give credence to the goals of organizations like the Trilateral Commission, the Council on Foreign Relations, the "Bilderbergs", etc. ?

Have I mentioned how much I love you, Angie?

I think you are very confused I am not interested in discussing complot theories.

g/g

done

MrOoijer, you seem to think that HG Wells's book The New World Order is fiction, and JudyHall apparently agrees. However, you are both mistaken. Take a look for yourself:
https://tinyurl.com/ya3aybpn

TallMike, From near the end of the book:

"All this I write to provide imaginative material for those who see the coming order as a mere blank interrogation."

Imaginative material. That is often called fiction. That Wells was writing political commentary may slide it into the venue of non-fiction but that is not the same as calling it factual.

You are welcome to think of Wells' vision as factual. I've already stated my opinion of how people interpret it. Commentary may both be non-fiction and non-factual. Arguing for fiction is something I'll leave to booksellers (as Amazon has it categorized under literature & fiction).

@TallMike - I know, I was a bit cheaky. Fictituous non-fiction. Did you know he wrote a prequel in 1928 called The Open Conspiracy?

And no, I didn't read it, but it was mentioned in a books about Utopuan thinking by Dutch philosoper Hans Achterhuis. And that we read in our book club.

Penguin, you do yourself a disservice by quoting one sentence of the book out of context, seizing on the words "imaginative material" and claiming that the book must therefore be of a type which is often called fiction.
Fortunately the link I posted allows anyone interested to read some or all of what Wells actually wrote and decide for themselves whether it is fiction.
In my opinion the entire book contains nothing but serious, detailed political analysis and commentary. Not that I find any of it particularly interesting or relevant, but that's another issue.

@MrOoijer - "Fictituous non-fiction"? Really? You can't squirm off the hook that easily.
Your actual words were, "NWO is fiction by HG Wells who was a science fiction writer." Your intent was clearly to belittle the starting point for the debate requested by JudyHall, but instead you sidetracked the discussion into whether the book was a work of fiction.

@MrOoijer - Belittling the book would be better accomplished thus:
HG Wells's book is a nightmare of overly detailed and ultimately pointless political analysis and commentary, and serves as a perfect example of the "intellectual" political diatribes of the first half of the 20th century.
I eagerly await your concurrence.

Judy -No you didn't single any one individual out, you used the umbrella approach - even lamer in my book. Like, 'all ya'lls are a-holes.'

Snark - Judy, so using the 'if you can't beat them, join them' approach, you decide to assign us all a topic. Hope you're enjoying what you're getting here. Hope you come to respect the people here as educated, individual thinkers who don't seem to want to play your game. I find your comment of 'not respecting those who just want to play' pathetic. You're guilty of not respecting those who want to talk. And why so much talk lately? Because there's a lunatic in the WH? A liar, a cheat, an adulterer, basically one of the worst examples of a human being imaginable, and the whole world is laughing at us. Sorry sister, we're using every forum to spread the word - WE ARE AFRAID.

Hey, Helen how about the last liar in the white house that did far worse than the one we have now-- You know the one that voted present in the senate except on one issue -- that was for the dr's to kill babies that were born alive during an abortion?????????

There has never been a worse president than the one today. NEVER. Single issue voters hold no water with me, wake up, take a look at the BIG PICTURE.

you do not need to hold water for me--- and I am not a single issue voter-- but mark my words-- which you will not be here nor I to see it but Trump will go down in history as a great president!!!!

done -have a great rest of your day

There's no denying Hitler was a great leader. Too bad he was on the wrong side of EVERYTHING. Same here.

LOL - What you said reminds me of one of my favorite lines from Guardians of the Galaxy: "Nothing goes over my head. I am too fast. I will catch it." Drax didn't understand the concept of metaphors either. :)

@TallMike - your remarks are right on the details and completely wrong in the broad picture.

The interbellum saw the birth of fascism. Which led to a war in which more than 15 million European civilians died, and I am not even talking about the pacific here.

You call that a nigtmare, let me reserve that term for the atrocities of the Nazi regime. You say "and serves as a perfect example of the 'intellectual' political diatribes of the first half of the 20th century" - well let that be "Mein Kampf" .

That's all I have to say about the NWO.

What I have to say: the resemblence between the interbellum and this decennium is obvious and frankly horrifying. The false accusations, the lies, the conspiracy theories, the disbelive in science ...

"Trump will go down in history", yes, down, down, down, because:
- he boasted about his business skills but filed for chapter 11 six times and was declared bankrupt 4 times (3 cases were bundled);
- and also because future generations will see his tax statements that he has now withheld and they will conclude that he would never have been elected if they were known at the time
- he was a major voice in the false accusations that Obama was not born in the US, and
- because futue genreations will understand that spreading false accusations is a typical fascist way to undermine democracy
- because 1,5 years in office already 6 members of his campaign team were either pleading guilty or indicted by the FBI
- oh well this list is endless, but maybe @ellenz can show me wrong

Indeed, with each passing day, one thinks nothing more can be added to the list, but surprise . . . there's something new each day :(

Quoting the one sentence may have been unfair. I'll stand by the rest of what I wrote.

There is no New World Order it is always the same. Those who have power will do anything to keep it. Those who can afford to buy politicians will. The real problem is that the Right Wing has control of all branches of government and are doing what they always do. Putting us even more in debt through tax cuts to the very wealthy who contribute to their campaigns. This adds to the deficit which the Right uses to say we now have to cut "entitlements" or privatize public services. Trump's dalliances with dictators, separating children from their parents, etc.. is just cover for what the Right is really doing to destroy our democracy and put the Commons into private hands. We have seen this happen before and until it affects the "average" American who believe it is better to demonize Democrats than to save Social Security from Wall Street, save the public schools from privateers, and allow our citizens to enjoy affordable health care, I am afraid we will continue to be stuck in the Same Old World Order of those with the most money will always benefit off the labor of those with the least.

tuco, how can it be "always the same" when there have been periods during which the situation was exactly the reverse? The left controlled all branches of the Federal government from 1961-1969 and from 1937-1945. There goes that theory, I guess.