Globalization: hope on the horizon despite the Fake Liberals.
Anthony Ravlich Human rights author, activist, outsider (26yrs)
Human Rights Council (New Zealand)
10D/15 City Rd.,
Ph: (0064) (09) 940.9658
I began seeking the truth in 1984 when New Zealand adopted neoliberalism and did not slow until I strongly believe I found it.
I discovered an ethical approach to human rights which would eliminate ideology and also found that both globalization and neoliberalism stem from the United Nations and are designed to eliminate the creative force, the magic, in my view, that led to the dominance of western culture.
This truth is based on fact, not opinion e.g. human rights omissions from international human rights law at the UN and is verifiable. But my book has been met with a resounding silence because, in my view, neoliberalism (the universal declaration with human rights omissions) has captured or contained the establishment since its introduction in the late 1970s (1984 in New Zealand). While ordinary people seem too overwhelmed by fear to even pass comment.
Also, typically, in my experience, the fake liberals who have managed to spread throughout society shut out and shut down any threatening truth irrespective of how beneficial it is for humanity as a whole.
Domestically, neoliberalism and globalization are driven by the left so-called liberals, who I call fake liberals because from my long observation they are really a social class. Whereas true liberals, the dominant elite prior to the introduction of neoliberalism, believe in individual freedom of thought, conscience and expression the fake liberals believe in collective thought, collective conscience and collective expression (the fake media being their collective voice).
The fake liberals are the left so-called liberals within countries (in America, the Democrats, in New Zealand, the Labor Party). They also dominate much of the mainstream media.
I consider the fake liberals which are the dominant elite in numerous countries as the major threat to the existence of global freedom and western civilization. In my book I describe in considerable detail (also see brief description below) how neoliberalism is designed to destroy western culture, see 'Ethical human rights: Freedom's Great Hope' (American Academic Press, 2017). Ebook link provided by my publishers: https://books.google.com/books?id=Z3nYDQAAQBAJ&printsec...=fals , also see Anthony Ravlich Google plus.
The fake liberals also drive the IMF’s globalization which is supported by many Corporations and many on the right wing of politics, creating what in America is called the ‘swamp’. Virtually all countries are controlled by the swamp although Donald Trump's America is struggling against it using the democratic process (i.e. making promises to Americans) with, it seems, much success.
In the year 2000 the Millennium Declaration was signed by 189 world leaders whose States virtually comprise the membership of the IMF and all appear to support the IMF's globalization policies which is evidenced in the Millennium Declaration which states in its "Values and Principles":
"We believe that the central challenge we face today is to ensure that globalization becomes a positive force for all the world's people" (“values and principles”, No 5).
Globalization leads the fake liberals to implement multi-culturalism and diversity which when taken to extreme would virtually eliminate western culture i.e. all cultures would be of equal importance. The fake liberals, following it appears the UN’s one world government agenda, also promote a country without borders taking globalization to another extreme.
The fake liberals use racism as a political weapon so anyone who objects to globalization is very likely to be labelled racist, fascist or a white nationalist. However, a country without a culture would, in my view, cease to exist i.e. it would be devoid of its raison d’etre which is meant to be passed onto future generations. Without a culture in war time there would be little to fight for i.e. usually a country fights for its way of life and freedom.
At present, in my view, many ordinary people seem overwhelmed with fear, almost ‘punch drunk’ after 30 years of oppression. In my experience apart from the rare exception they are not ready to face the truth, and are freeloading off future generations i.e. leaving the problems for the young to resolve.
A good State would, in my view, defend the country’s culture but countries controlled by the swamp, created by the fake liberals, seem unlikely to. In my book I recommend that the West boycott the UN until it has corrected its gross human rights malpractice e.g. the UN’s human rights omissions (see below) involve major violations of the Universal Declaration and the UN Charter. I consider such a boycott is only likely to succeed if other political parties which oppose the swamp gain power which seems likely in the European Union.
A recent example in New Zealand where the culture was threatened is described in the article, 'Controversial Canadian speaker denied visa as Auckland agency cancels booking' (Stuff NZ, 6 July 2018). Lauren Southern was one of the speakers who are libertarians. According to the article her views on immigration prompted the New Zealand Federation of Islam Associations to ask the Government to bar her entry to New Zealand. In March, Southern was barred from entering the United Kingdom, with a Home Office spokesperson saying her presence in the UK was "not conducive to the public good", international media reported.
I consider the New Zealand Federation of Islam Associations are engaging in cultural warfare yet they must have understood that free speech is part of western culture and their religion would likely be criticised. I am a human rights activist and would not go to some countries e.g. North Korea, unless I intended to engage in cultural warfare. So why would Muslims come to the west especially as there are about 50 Muslim-dominated countries in the world. Do they wish to replace western culture with an Islamic caliphate!?
Muslims could also hold the leadership of Muslim majority countries to account for their support at the UN for the human rights omissions (see below) which keep their populations backward and with little hope (see brief description of neoliberalism below).
Ethical human rights, which I discovered and promote, simply requires that all should be ensured, at least, the core minimum of all the human rights in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It was first outlined in my first book, 'Freedom from our social prisons: the rise of economic, social and cultural rights' (Lexington Books, 2008). It gained remarkable support on the internet e.g. the US State Dept., Open Democracy Initiative of the White House, even the UN itself and others but the mainstream media i.e. the fake liberals, refused to report it.
Ethical human rights is firmly based on the Universal Declaration which means firmly based on universal human rights truth with no human rights omissions. In my view, ethical human rights should replace ideology. Ethical human rights can, in my view, be reflected in domestic and international human rights law.
A brave person could adopt ethical human rights which, in my personal experience, keeps me in contact with the Eternal or God i.e. I see God as the absolute universal truth. However, in my experience the fake liberals seem only capable of responding to any threatening truth with cruelty irrespective of how beneficial it is for humanity.
Also, in contrast to the IMF’s globalization under ethical human rights the prime duty of the State is to ensure the people of one’s own country have their ethical human rights and also, where possible, there is a duty to help other countries unable to ensure ethical human rights for their people. The primary emphasis on one’s own country is similar to Donald Trump’s America first. The global duties of ethical human rights is a ‘common sense’ approach to globalization which would not lead to the destruction of a country’s economy.
My book also describes the momentous decisions made by the UN on 10th December 2008 behind a global iron curtain i.e. not reported by the mainstream media. The UN gave equal status to economic, social and cultural rights and civil and political rights for the first time under international human rights law. However, because of the existence of human rights omissions it created a new globally dominant ideology, also hidden from humanity, which I call neoliberal absolutism. The latter replaced neoliberalism. Neoliberal absolutism certainly appears to suit the one world government agenda of the UN where all States would be subjected to a form of totalitarianism.
In particular, because America has never ratified the covenant on economic, social and cultural rights neoliberal absolutism resulted in a major rebalance of global ideological and economic power from the West to the Rest.
In addition, exploitation was permitted by omission under international law which meant Corporations could relocate to countries with cheap labour without fear of exploitation being prohibited. The latter was in my strong view the real reason for the global financial crisis 2008 with the EU by far the worst affected. America was the major opposition to neoliberal absolutism with some support from the American camp e.g. Canada, Britain, Australia and Japan.
The UN has determined the West for decline and is promoting totalitarian, repressive States and political Islam. The latter have risen at the UN to virtually control the UN human rights agenda. With the UN determining the west for decline, in my view, the fake liberals promote Muslim interests, in particular, because they have global support at the UN while Muslims are also favored because they can engage in cultural warfare and so undermine western culture.
I regard neoliberal absolutism as ‘evil’ because in my experience many would not be able to think for themselves or even have a conscience of their own. My experience is based on 20 years of being on the receiving end of a form of totalitarianism which I consider is how neoliberalism impacted on those lower on the social scale.
In the New Zealand section I describe how on June 2010 I made a stand on principle leading to an appearance in the Auckland High Court where I describe a NZ Tragedy with many ‘crushed and isolated’. The Judge believed my account asking me why I had not informed New Zealand earlier. In my view, many would have ended up in the mental health and criminal justice systems.
As stated above my recent book describes how neoliberalism is designed to destroy western culture. Put simply, the United Nations omits a number of human rights from international human rights law and those omissions are reflected in nearly all countries in their constitutions (in New Zealand, the bill of rights).
One of the UN's human rights omissions includes individual self-determination i.e. the seeking of truth, hopes and dreams sometimes depicted by the iconic American superhero. The omissions are designed to crush the potential of the population leaving it backward. The omissions also suppress dissent making it difficult for leadership to be held to account. In addition, the omissions result in the gross neglect of large numbers resulting in divided societies world-wide.
In my view, State leaderships are using the UN as a way of protecting their interests away from the sight of their populations and voters. Ensuring backward populations with little hope would very likely result in higher levels of emigration and refuges with western countries, being somewhat better off, the most affected.
Neoliberalism and globalization are compatible. For example, both suppress entrepreneurship, intelligence and creativity - neoliberalism by omitting the right to individual self-determination and globalization by greatly emphasizing the global free market over the domestic free market. Both are designed to eliminate the creative force, the magic, in my view, which led to the dominance of western culture.
In my view, the fake liberals, the dominant elite in many countries, and who dominate the bureaucracies of the UN and EU, pose the greatest threat to global freedom and western civilization however the existence of Donald Trump’s America, to some extent Brexit and the growing opposition to the swamp by many political parties in the EU, means there is hope on the horizon.