Globalists promise Utopia, ignore reality
By Charles Bloomer
Walter Cronkite is in the news once again, pushing his globalist agenda. In a January 29th interview with BBC News, Mr. Cronkite said, "American people are going to have to realise that perhaps they are going to have to yield some sovereignty to an international body to enforce world law." Referring to the United Nations, he called for "an executive" to make international law, military forces to enforce that law, and a "judicial system to bring the criminals to justice before they have the opportunity" to engage in terrorist acts. In Mr. Cronkite's view, "Our whole society is in danger" from "terrorism, national war movements, civil war type movements."
The interview with BBC News reinforced Mr. Cronkite's remarks to the World Federalist Association last October. Addressing the WFA, Mr. Cronkite said, "Americans will have to yield up some of our sovereignty. That would be a bitter pill." Mr. Cronkite goes on to put urgency in the need for global government. "Time will not wait. Democracy, civilization itself, is at stake. Within the next few years we must change the basic structure of our global community from the present anarchic system of war to a new system governed by a democratic UN federation."
Walter Cronkite isn't alone in his internationalist views. In October of last year , in remarks to Forum of Federations in Mont-Tremblant, Canada, President Clinton spoke enthusiastically of a new international "federalism." His example, "Exhibit A", was the European Union. The European Union, he said, is "a new form of federalism, where the states in this case, the nations of Europe are far more important and powerful" than the EU, but the states "are giving enough functions over to the federal government to reinforce their mutual interest in an integrated economy, and in some political circumstances."
Before we take these utopian views too seriously, we should take a look at reality. Recent actions by the European Union, Mr. Clinton's "Exhibit A", may make us pause in our headlong dash to a world government.
The European Court of Justice in Luxembourg, the judicial "branch" of the EU, has ruled that Germany must admit women to the armed forces. This despite the fact that the German Constitution prohibits women in the military.
The European Court of Human Rights ruled that the UK must admit gays into the military. British military chiefs believe that open homosexuality adversely affects morale. Ninety percent of Britons polled agreed. This court decision and the government's agreement to abide by the ruling have led to the resignation of two senior military officers.
The leaders of 14 European Union governments have threatened to ostracize Austria if an anti-immigrant right-wing party joins a new coalition government in Vienna. The European Union issued a statement saying the heads of the other 14 EU countries had unanimously agreed to isolate Austria diplomatically if the populist Freedom Party comes to power. According to the Washington Times, "The extraordinary decision would be the harshest sanction against a member ever issued by the 43-year-old economic union and would target a party that finished second in democratic elections last fall and is, by some new polls, the single most popular party in Austria today." The London Guardian reported that "Austrians were shocked and angered" by the collective threat from the EU.
Each of the three cases cited above is an example of the abuse of power by unaccountable, unelected international bodies riding roughshod over constitutional, democratic sovereignty. A bitter pill indeed, Mr. Cronkite.
Is this the New World Order in which Mr. Cronkite or President Clinton want us to participate? Are Americans supposed to jump at the chance to yield some sovereignty to the United Nations, whose members include totalitarian dictatorships?
Are we willing to yield American sovereignty to a global authority that may one day decide that our Constitution is not valid? The United Nations has already mounted an attack against the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. UN Under Secretary General for Disarmament Affairs Jayantha Dhanapala said this in July 1999: "The global proliferation of small arms is another area where urgent measures are needed ." Subsequently, in August 1999, the UN Security Council unanimously adopted the "Report of the Group of Governmental Experts on Small Arms" which lists 24 recommendations that add up to a near-total ban on private gun ownership. Would the UN challenge the other "unalienable rights" guaranteed by our Bill of Rights? Is this the sovereignty Mr. Cronkite thinks we should yield?
Are we willing to let the United Nations make our military policy, or determine who can and who cannot serve in our armed forces? How long would it take before some unelected "world court" decided that our military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy violated homosexuals' civil rights? How long before some unelected, unaccountable international bureaucrat decides that our policy of not sending women into combat was in violation of some international "law"? Is this the sovereignty Mr. Cronkite thinks we should yield?
Are we willing to allow an international body tell us that our democratically elected representatives cannot take office without risk of sanctions? If they had had the power, would the UN have threatened the US in 1994 when the Republicans took control of Congress? Is this the sovereignty Mr. Cronkite thinks we should yield?
Senator Jesse Helms has a different view. In his address to the UN Security Council recently Senator Helms claimed that the American people will not accept a United Nations "aspiring to establish itself as the central authority of a new international order of global laws and global governance." He said it would be a "fanciful notion" that the United States needs to ask for or receive the approval of the United Nations in order to undertake actions that are "inherently legitimate." Senator Helms understands that this push toward global federalism is a "threat to the God-given freedoms of the American people, a claim of political authority without their consent." Senator Helms told the UN, "There is only one source of legitimacy of the American government's policies and that is the consent of the American people."
The attempt to push governmental power upward removes that power from its legitimacy in the consent of the governed. The further the power is from the people, the more corrupt are those who wield power. Walter Cronkite, President Clinton and the other globalists ignore the reality of the abuses caused by yielding sovereignty to supra-national bodies. They ignore the perils in entrusting our rights to an unaccountable, distant global government with an "executive" who makes the laws and a military that enforces them. They prefer to dream of an unattainable perfect world where the ultimate in big government, the United Nations, benevolently dispenses harmony and social justice. Americans should be suspicious of the utopian promises being made by today's proponents of world federalism.
The globalists may promise an international utopia of peace and prosperity, but they will deliver only universal slavery.
© 2000 Charles Bloomer. Mr. Bloomer can be contacted at email@example.com
© 1996-2013, Enter Stage Right and/or its creators. All rights reserved.