counter create hit The New World Order - Download Free eBook
Ads Banner
Hot Best Seller

The New World Order

Availability: Ready to download

With prophetic timing, Yale-educated lawyer and broadcaster Pat Robertson takes a penetrating look at the reality and rhetoric of the new world order and gives a compelling assessment of the imminent dangers looming on the world's horizon.


Compare
Ads Banner

With prophetic timing, Yale-educated lawyer and broadcaster Pat Robertson takes a penetrating look at the reality and rhetoric of the new world order and gives a compelling assessment of the imminent dangers looming on the world's horizon.

30 review for The New World Order

  1. 4 out of 5

    M Caulfield

    Many view Pat Robertson as a right-wing religious nut. Regardless of how you view him as a person, if you have the ability to separate what he says from what you think he is (or what the media has told yo he is), and you can extrapolate (as most intelligent people can), then this book is enlightening. This book helps answer writer Pam Keller's questions and comments about the general direction of the United States of America and its place in the rest of the world: We have spent two or more decades Many view Pat Robertson as a right-wing religious nut. Regardless of how you view him as a person, if you have the ability to separate what he says from what you think he is (or what the media has told yo he is), and you can extrapolate (as most intelligent people can), then this book is enlightening. This book helps answer writer Pam Keller's questions and comments about the general direction of the United States of America and its place in the rest of the world: We have spent two or more decades intentionally de-industrializing our economy. Why? We have intentionally dumbed down our schools, ignored our history, and no longer teach our founding documents, why we are exceptional, and why we are worth preserving. Students by and large cannot write, think critically, read, or articulate. Parents are not revolting, teachers are not picketing, school boards continue to back mediocrity. Why? We have now established the precedent of protesting every close election (now violently in California over a proposition that is so controversial that it wants marriage to remain between one man and one woman. Did you ever think such a thing possible just a decade ago?). We have corrupted our sacred political process by allowing unelected judges to write laws that radically change our way of life, and then mainstream Marxist groups like ACORN and others to turn our voting system into a banana republic. To what purpose? Now our mortgage industry is collapsing, housing prices are in free fall, major industries are failing, our banking system is on the verge of collapse, Social Security is nearly bankrupt, as is Medicare and our entire government. Our education system is worse than a joke (I've taught college courses and know precisely what I am talking about.) The list is staggering in its length, breadth, and depth. It is potentially 1929 x 10. And we are at war with an enemy we cannot name for fear of offending people of the same religion who cannot wait to slit the throats of your children if they have the opportunity to do so. We have a president whose idea is to create and fund a mandatory civilian defense force stronger than our military for use inside our borders. Why? Change is indeed coming and when it comes, you will never see the same nation again. Don't forget that in the past, Germany was the most educated, cultured country in Europe. It was full of music, art, museums, hospitals, laboratories, and universities. And in less than six years - a shorter time span than just two terms of the U. S. presidency - it was rounding up its own citizens, killing others, abrogating its laws, turning children against parents, and neighbors against neighbors All with the best of intentions, of course. The road to Hell is paved with them.

  2. 4 out of 5

    Mark

    The problem with Pat Robertson is not so much how the media portrays him as a "bigoted, fundamentalist Christian, right-wing zealot" (page 263), as it is how he portrays himself as one in, for instance, his 1991 book The New World Order, in which he goes on at great length to convince the reader that a shadowy group of people spent the better part of the 20th century trying to take over the world and form a one-world government in a sort of new world order, or NWO. Its first credibility problem The problem with Pat Robertson is not so much how the media portrays him as a "bigoted, fundamentalist Christian, right-wing zealot" (page 263), as it is how he portrays himself as one in, for instance, his 1991 book The New World Order, in which he goes on at great length to convince the reader that a shadowy group of people spent the better part of the 20th century trying to take over the world and form a one-world government in a sort of new world order, or NWO. Its first credibility problem starts with the back cover, with quotes like "Shocking...", "Riveting...a page turner", "reads like a spy thriller...chilling...I couldn't put it down", which are, of course, attributed to absolutely no one. Robertson displays his literal, narrow-minded and paranoid world view right in the introduction. He calls John Lennon a hypocrite for writing a song like "Imagine" yet still leaving a fortune to his "Japanese-born" wife because Robertson's mind can only see the literal content a song about the beauty of the potential oneness of humanity with nothing dividing it, and can't grasp its obvious poeticism. And he interprets the 1991 coup in the Soviet Union, which was still playing out as he was writing the book (but ultimately led to the USSR's collapse), as a "coup" obviously staged to make the Communist threat seem less potent, so as a country we would let our guard down and cease hostilities, therefore becoming a weakened and complicit nation that would allow the forces of the NWO to encroach upon our sovereignty, or something. Of course he can only define the ringleaders of this insidious NWO plot vaguely as a mix of Liberals, Communists, New Agers, Socialists, Buddhists, Hindus, homosexuals, secular humanists, and worst of all globalists (whom he clearly thinks are all one and the same) and thinks nothing of lumping in the Trilateral Commission and the Council on Foreign Relations, which he describes only as organizations he doesn't like because of their influence in the policies of Presidents Bush 41, Carter, and Nixon (whose decision to normalize relations with Communist China he cites as proof). Pat also goes after the Federal Reserve, which is a well worn target of paranoids everywhere. We all, more or less, know that it was founded way back in 1913, but I think it's fair to say must of us have no idea what the hell the Fed does, which conspiracy theorists like Pat take complete advantage of. He claims the Federal Reserve takes the control of money away from the Congress and puts it in the hands of unelected officials who use the Fed's powers to, among other things, create money out of thin air and charge the taxpayers interest for each dollar that is issued, thus creating the national debt (which Pat claims has only risen in the years since the Fed was created). And as you might imagine, claims this independent power is used to manipulate the economy for furthering the NWO's insidious, but somewhat vague goals of world domination. It's a claim made across the political spectrum of conspiracy theorists, and one of the main points of the pseudo-documentary "Zeitgeist", which has been pushed on me by a lot of well-meaning liberals, who really should know better. Just to be clear, the Fed is independent, so elected officials can't manipulate the economy for political gain, and raises the interest rate when the economy heats up and lowers the interest rate when the economy slows down, it's not perfect, and mistakes are made, as can be seen in recent years, but it's not the same thing as saying it's deliberate. Again, to be clear, debt is not created in the way Pat implies it is, it's created when the government finances budget deficits by issuing government bonds to people and institutions in exchange for money, so there. Pat delves briefly into the history of the NWO, framing the French Revolution as something engineered by the Illuminati, who didn't believe in borders (or something, Illuminati motives and modus operandi are always a little vague) and sewed the seeds of discontent within France, clearly not understanding how the excess and decadence of the aristocracy, and their inability to provide for the working classes shaped it. In other words, in Pat's mind, as it is with most conspiracy theorists, history isn't shaped by various cultural and economic forces that are sometimes not understood completely for years, it's manipulated by dark forces, to which everything deemed as "bad" that has happened can be attributed, which informs his interpretation of 20th century history, as seen in the book. And I'd argue, his discussion with Jerry Falwell about 9/11, in which they concluded the terrorist attacks had more to do with the moral decay of the country represented by their political enemies, rather than the extremism of the terrorists themselves, points to this. He goes into lot of detail into what he claims are the NWO's ultimate goals, which are the usual conspiracy theory checklist of paranoid claims, including, but not limited to the absolute control of all of humanity. Yikes, that is pretty insidious stuff but he doesn't explain how the NWO will achieve its intended goals, because, just like the underpants gnomes of "South Park" who can't explain the missing step in between stealing underpants and making lots and lots of money, Robertson can't fill in the blanks in between what he believes are signs of the NWO's manipulations and their end game of world domination. The book's bibliography cites the many books Pat's used as sources for his many outlandish claims, but there are a curious lack of footnotes, which I think was a deliberate strategy to lump together the works of legitimate scholars and historians, such as Robert Reich, Thomas Friedman, and David Halbertstam, with famously anti-Semitic conspiracy theorists Nesta Webster and Eustace Mullins, which makes it harder to research each claim independently, leading the reader to stop after verifying maybe only a few of them, thus giving the whole thing the illusion of fidelity. Pat's religious and cultural bigotry is on display throughout but it's at it's clearest when he recounts the controversy over his comments as a presidential candidate in 1988, and his subsequent indignant and defensive response to the press, when he stated that he would only hire Jews and Christians in his administration because everyone else, by their very nature, has inferior decision-making skills. And as of the writing of the book, he still believes this is a valid argument, and is proud to reassert it. Now in politics, as in many human endeavors, there is often quite a bit of projection, and this book is no exception. Pat condemns, rather frequently, a cabal of college professors who work to indoctrinate their students with a narrow, politically correct outlook, conditioning them to believe in a vaguely defined and patently absurd utopian philosophy that will magically unite the world. I couldn't help but wonder, what is Pat doing with his financial resources, media holdings, universities, and narrow definition of Christianity, if not that? In conclusion, The New World Order makes an entertaining read on the level of political pornography, but it points to some troubling trends in modern politics. Robertson's influence has grown since this book was originally published. His extremism is now the mainstream for not only the modern GOP, but conservatism in general, to such an extent, Republican presidential nominees seek his endorsement for legitimacy. It makes me wonder what kind of future the Republican Party has as long as conservatism is tied to people like him, and what it will mean for the country ultimately.

  3. 5 out of 5

    Michael

    This is probably worth less than two stars, but it was entertainingly bad enough that I did read the whole thing, so I can't just give it one. Going over it this time, I was surprised at how dated the "timely" and "prescient"(in 1990) information in it already is, but also how timeless the right-wing conspiracy line is in its essentials. In an era before the Tea Party, Pat Robertson was the extremely wealthy voice of Evangelical extremism. He had been a successful Televangelist at the time when This is probably worth less than two stars, but it was entertainingly bad enough that I did read the whole thing, so I can't just give it one. Going over it this time, I was surprised at how dated the "timely" and "prescient"(in 1990) information in it already is, but also how timeless the right-wing conspiracy line is in its essentials. In an era before the Tea Party, Pat Robertson was the extremely wealthy voice of Evangelical extremism. He had been a successful Televangelist at the time when that scam was gouging billions of dollars out of poor and ignorant Americans, but he had always had a more political bent than his fellow get-rich-quick preachers. Probably as a result, he avoided the sex scandals that brought several of his colleagues down, and even managed to be a semi-serious contender in Republican primaries a couple of times. He also wrote book like this one (more than most Televangelists could manage), warning of the direction America was headed. The warnings are nothing new - a one-world government is going to steal American sovereignty and reduce its citizens to slavery in the name of idealism, while really benefiting an elite group of financiers and apparatchiks. What's interesting is that he manages to repeat them, without letting on their traditional allegiances to anti-Semtism and fascism. That's not to say that his hands are clean (I'll get to that in a moment), but that there is no overt racism in this book, no use of the language of prejudice. In that sense, I do think he managed to start the extreme Right in a new direction, which has resulted in their "mainstreaming" to the degree that wackos like Sarah Palin and Rick Santorum now appear to be middle-of-the-road conservatives. Look deeper, of course, and the real sources of what Robertson is arguing begins to become clear. He argues that the wealthy and powerful are in cahoots with Communism and civil disorder, and tries to tie it together in the name of the "Illuminati," a code-word that hides the real villains of many of his sources. For example, he quotes from Nesta Webster's writings approvingly, without mentioning that she openly identified the villains a Jews, or that she was affiliated with the British Union of Fascists. He doesn't actually cite the The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, but many of his arguments are derived directly from it. He has managed to re-package a traditionally racist/fascist argument in such a manner as to give it a certain amount of acceptability. Which raises the question of whether Robertson himself is an anti-Semite. It's hard to say. He's careful to speak approvingly of Israel, and not to implicate them in the conspiracy. He even ridicules Idi-Amin for doing so in front of the UN. Surely he noticed that most of the sources he drew from denounced Jews, and sometimes other races, as enemies of civilization. But what did/does he believe? That's hard to say. He's a slippery one, possibly more interested in his own power and influence than in ideological consistency. Those who have followed him, in terms of believing in him, seem to do so without question - they're not racists unless he says it's OK to be racist. In the end, it probably doesn't matter. As a demagogue, Robertson's danger isn't in specific points of his program, but in the ways in which he manipulates ignorance to increase its influence on the political sphere. And this, sadly, he has succeeded at tremendously, if not decisively. Others now carry on the tradition. Possibly this could have been prevented if more of his opponents had read this book.

  4. 5 out of 5

    Mike Frazier

    Funny as Shit.

  5. 5 out of 5

    Shawn

    I read this book when it originally came out in 1991. At the time, I believed some of Robertson's predictions may come true, but dismissed others as too far-fetched. I read the book again in 2010 and was shocked to realize that most everything he predicted has come true. Every more disturbing is that many things are much worse than the book described. Pat Robertson hit the nail on the head with this one. Today it reads more like a history book.

  6. 4 out of 5

    Dawn

    wow very good about what will be happening in the rapture

  7. 5 out of 5

    Didit Priandi

    Sebuah teori konspirasi dunia dari pendekatan kristiani.

  8. 5 out of 5

    البخاري يبي

    غريب و وارد

  9. 5 out of 5

    Frank

    LOL it's kinda embarrassing that, before I even knew who Pat Robertson was, I chose to read this book out of all the books available at the local library. Best thing I remember from reading this like 15 years ago: he suggests cutting down the forests of Siberia to make farmland. I mean, is that actually true or did I invent that? It seems so insane it can't be something that someone actually said, but I guess that means it'd be pretty hard for me to make it up on my own, right?

  10. 5 out of 5

    Adrienna

    Pat Roberson takes a historical and political viewpoint to speak on the notion of the "New World Order"; however it is outdated to current events today. It also speaks on countries that are no longer using that name such as Soviet Union. It was copyrighted in 1991. He also speaks on occult-inspired world socialist dictatorship and idealist views.

  11. 4 out of 5

    Charlotte

    Okay, everyone! Let's all get together and whistle the X-Files theme. C'mon, you know you want to after reading a chapter, no, a paragraph of this book.

  12. 4 out of 5

    C.

    Very dated.

  13. 5 out of 5

    Lee Harding

    An excellent eye-opener. That segment of new lies for old has not come true, at least not yet.

  14. 5 out of 5

    Teri Armstrong

  15. 4 out of 5

    Brian Phillips

  16. 5 out of 5

    Angela Blair

  17. 4 out of 5

    Joshua

  18. 5 out of 5

    Richard

  19. 4 out of 5

    Justin

  20. 4 out of 5

    Carla

  21. 5 out of 5

    Michael Crary

  22. 5 out of 5

    Dave Grant

  23. 5 out of 5

    Dallas Powell, jr.

  24. 5 out of 5

    Destiny Grace

  25. 5 out of 5

    Mark

  26. 4 out of 5

    Anthony

  27. 4 out of 5

    Troy Maclean

  28. 5 out of 5

    Molly Wason

  29. 4 out of 5

    Jennie

  30. 5 out of 5

    Dewangga Dundung

Add a review

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Loading...
We use cookies to give you the best online experience. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy.