241 years since 1776 - Where is our Democracy?

Image result for 4th of july coming

After 241 years America’s democracy goal has not been achieved or realized. Democracy means rule by the people.What has emerged since our founding is a form of tyranny (under the direction of a Deep State and Central Banking) which is now emerging into global tyranny (for the masses). Agenda 2030 is my view of global tyranny as a few elites are scheduled to rule the entire planet. Is this what our founding fathers designed in 1776? I don’t think so! What a shame that the ideals of America’s founders have resulted in precisely ‘the opposite’ of what was desired at our founding.


On Thursday, Henry Kissinger was over in Moscow visiting with Vladimir Putin. He likely was discussing the Agenda 2030 concept and its global goals. Mr. Kissinger has been dreaming about a one world government and a new world order (called Globalism) under the direction of select elites (like himself) for some time. Will Vladimir buy into this worldview? I, personally, don’t think so. Vladimir desires some form of nationalism or regionalism and not what Mr. Kissinger desires for our planet (Globalism). America’s Deep State is fully at work, however, to promote an agenda which is totally contrary to the ideals of America’s founding fathers.


The Declaration of Independence, 90% written by Thomas Jefferson, proposed a world of equals where the State acted as the temporary problem…not the solution. A huge centralized governmental structure was not the plan of America’s founding fathers (with a few exceptions). The followers of Alexander Hamilton were envisioning a centralized system which could compete with the European systems and then rule the entire planet. Hamilton’s promotion of this agenda ended in 1804 with his duel with a challenger called Aaron Burr. Hamilton lost this challenge and died as a result of this duel. But did his vision die?


The legacy of Hamilton has emerged gradually and relentlessly. Today our trend is towards centralization and not towards decentralization (the vision of Thomas Jefferson). Agenda 2030, the United Nations vision, is now the model for our planet. Our Deep State operatives (like Henry Kissinger and George Soros) are big proponents of this end result. My hope is that Vladimir Putin does not relent and adopt the mantra of Henry and his followers. Vladimir can be a positive force for meaningful change in the direction of real democracy (equality among all individuals) if he continues to challenge the current model of America’s shadow government.


Watch the events this coming week over in Hamburg, Germany, as our Deep State operatives (with their political puppets) meet to discuss world affairs. The G-20 is meeting and Vladimir Putin will meet for the first time with Donald Trump. Will he challenge the Donald’s trend towards WAR and CENTRALIZATION? Or will he abandon his independence and adopt the vision of the Deep State? Agenda 2030 is what everyone needs to recognize as the goal of our Deep State operatives. Check it out and read the fine details at the U.N. website! Enjoy the 4th and think about where we stand as of 2017! I am: https://kingdomecon.wordpress.com.


Some additional images for your consideration:

Image result for henry kissinger meets with putin in moscow

Is Henry Kissinger promoting his vision of a New World Order with Agenda 2030 as the ideal for Russia and the World? Russian President Vladimir Putin (R) meets with former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger at the Kremlin in Moscow, Russia June 29, 2017. Picture taken June 29, 2017. Sputnik/Alexei Druzhinin/Kremlin via REUTERS

Image result for henry kissinger meets with putin in moscow

Henry and Vladimir at the Kremlin (June 29) discussing the vision of our Deep State???


Image result for does kissinger support obama's agenda of globalism

Image result for does kissinger support obama's agenda of globalism

Image result for does kissinger support obama's agenda of globalismRelated image

Image result for does kissinger support obama's agenda of globalism

Image result for does kissinger support obama's agenda of globalism

Image result for does kissinger support obama's agenda of globalism

Image result for does kissinger support obama's agenda of globalism

World Order Audiobook

“Dazzling and instructive . . . [a] magisterial new book.” —Walter Isaacson, Time


Henry Kissinger offers in World Order a deep meditation on the roots of international harmony and global disorder. Drawing on his experience as one of the foremost statesmen of the modern era—advising presidents, traveling the world, observing and shaping the central foreign policy events of recent decades—Kissinger now reveals his analysis of the ultimate challenge for the twenty-first century: how to build a shared international order in a world of divergent historical perspectives, violent conflict, proliferating technology, and ideological extremism.


There has never been a true “world order,” Kissinger observes. For most of history, civilizations defined their own concepts of order. Each considered itself the center of the world and envisioned its distinct principles as universally relevant. China conceived of a global cultural hierarchy with the emperor at its pinnacle.



In Europe, Rome imagined itself surrounded by barbarians; when Rome fragmented, European peoples refined a concept of an equilibrium of sovereign states and sought to export it across the world. Islam, in its early centuries, considered itself the world’s sole legitimate political unit, destined to expand indefinitely until the world was brought into harmony by religious principles. The United States was born of a conviction about the universal applicability of democracy—a conviction that has guided its policies ever since.


Now international affairs take place on a global basis, and these historical concepts of world order are meeting. Every region participates in questions of high policy in every other, often instantaneously. Yet there is no consensus among the major actors about the rules and limits guiding this process or its ultimate destination. The result is mounting tension.


Grounded in Kissinger’s deep study of history and his experience as national security advisor and secretary of state, World Order guides readers through crucial episodes in recent world history. Kissinger offers a unique glimpse into the inner deliberations of the Nixon administration’s negotiations with Hanoi over the end of the Vietnam War, as well as Ronald Reagan’s tense debates with Soviet Premier Gorbachev in Reykjavík.


He offers compelling insights into the future of U.S.–China relations and the evolution of the European Union, and he examines lessons of the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. Taking readers from his analysis of nuclear negotiations with Iran through the West’s response to the Arab Spring and tensions with Russia over Ukraine, World Order anchors Kissinger’s historical analysis in the decisive events of our time.


Provocative and articulate, blending historical insight with geopolitical prognostication, World Order is a unique work that could come only from a lifelong policy maker and diplomat. 


Comment: Agenda 2030 follows the Kissinger mindset of small nations (much as today) existing UNDER a central committee of elites (as ultimate rulers)! Given human nature, this results in global Communism or the equivalent! Watch out for the deceptions within our political rhetoric!


Autumn Cote Added Jul 3, 2017 - 6:23pm
Please note, the second best way to draw more attention to your work is to comment on the work of others. I know this to be true because if you do, I'll do everything in my power to draw more attention to your articles.
PS - There is a lot I can do and would like to do on your behalf.
Donald Swenson Added Jul 3, 2017 - 7:40pm
Thanks. Will do. D
Katharine Otto Added Jul 4, 2017 - 1:44am
Good post.  Lots of people talk about the "New World Order."  The sad irony is the perpetrators are totally dependent on other people's money and resources to fund it.  They are only proving themselves less and less relevant as leaders, so out of touch with the peons are they.  
I suspect the New World Order is imploding because the players can't even get along with each other.  How can they expect to control the masses with their version of organization?  
I read a lot about world dominion, or galaxy dominion, in sci-fi.  My perpetual question is "What next?"  once the dominant get what they want.  It appears the result is a population of weak and debilitated people who don't have the will or interest in serving the bosses.
Patrick Writes Added Jul 4, 2017 - 1:50am
Hamilton was Washington's aide de camp for much of the American Revolution (probably because he spoke fluent French, was smart, resourceful, and devoted to the cause). 
He saw first hand how powerless the U.S. confederacy was under the Articles of Confederation. It's a wonder the Constitutional Army held together for all 6 years of the war. They were constantly strapped for money, weapons, supplies, everything. 
Guys like Jefferson never even wanted the U.S. constitution. He liked the Articles of Confederation and was horrified at the Constitution when he first saw it (he was in France as Ambassador during the Constitutional Convention so discovered it after the fact). 
I've concluded Jefferson was a bit of a 'head in the clouds' aristocrat. He apparently hated being president. 
It was Hamilton's idea to start the first Bank of the United States to assume the Revolutionary War debt of the states and ensure it was all paid back. Jefferson disliked it and attacked it in the press via surrogates. Then, as President, used the Bank of the United States to finance the Louisiana Purchase. No cognitive dissonance there. 
There is such a thing as a happy medium. If guys like Hamilton and Washington advocated a strong central government, it was because the central government up to that point was powerless. And they didn't create a "strong central government". They create a very small federal government, but one which had a bit of power. 
George N Romey Added Jul 4, 2017 - 4:40am
We have allowed ourselves to be taken over by a one world government.  Those that complain are branded as hate mongers and refusal to accept other cultures.  
John G Added Jul 4, 2017 - 5:51am
Romey :We have allowed ourselves to be taken over by a one world government.
But George Romey, Alex Jones, Fox News and Peter Schiff will lead us all to the enlightenment eh George?
What actually happens when you "end the Fed!!!!!!!!'
JC Added Jul 4, 2017 - 10:07am
Yes, it is ironic that Jefferson who advocated a weak central government actually expanded it's powers with the Louisiana Purchase as he didn't have the specific powers to buy this land from Napoleon. This surely paved the way for implied executive powers.
It's also worth noting that Jefferson believed there should be a revolution every 20 years or so to stop the very thing he was faced with doing... expanding the powers of the government.
Stone-Eater Friedli Added Jul 4, 2017 - 10:11am
Didn't know that you had one...
Donald Swenson Added Jul 4, 2017 - 1:45pm
Patrick: You make many good points. My sense is that Alexander Hamilton was not a 'real' American at heart. I think he desired our new country to challenge the Europeans and create what we witness today (bigness). Jefferson tried to challenge his ideas but Washington seemed to like Alexander and his views. I wonder why he accepted this duel with Burr? It must have been over their ideas for America. Burr and Jefferson wanted smallness and they both seemed to fear centralized power. Jefferson (while president) did alter his views some, but during his retirement he wrote mostly about freedom and independence from foreign affairs. Jefferson and Adams died precisely on July 4, 1826 (50 years after the signing of the Declaration). D
Donald Swenson Added Jul 4, 2017 - 1:46pm
My sense is that Jefferson is still active (spiritually) as his beliefs centered on a Creator God. Many think he was an atheist, but his writings reveal the opposite. He was a strong believer in a Higher Power/Intelligence. D
Neelon Crawford Added Jul 4, 2017 - 11:36pm
What are the names of the few elites that are scheduled to rule the planet on what date is it supposed to occur? 
Don’t bother answering those questions, as we both know you have no idea of their names or the date.  What you presented is just another conspiracy theory and I think the world has way too many conspiracy theories and theorists. 
Do me a favor and tell me the name of a single “elite,” no need to explain how they plan to rule the rule.  Whomever you name is likely someone successful or elected.  Assuming you’re right and these elites wish to rule the world, what person would you prefer, someone successful or elected, or someone unsuccessful or unelected?
Donald Swenson Added Jul 5, 2017 - 12:05am
Henry Kissinger, George Soros, Mr. Zuckerberg. All would accept a role in ruling the planet. Have you read Kissinger's recent book? Check it out on Amazon. It's called World Order. It's getting rave reviews from folks with your worldview. Henry is over in Russia as I write, promoting a NWO with Putin. D
Donald Swenson Added Jul 5, 2017 - 12:08am
Neelon, what is your background on Geo politics? Have you read Agenda 2030 at the United Nations website? D
Neelon Crawford Added Jul 5, 2017 - 12:14am
Accepting a role in ruling the planet is not what you asserted in your article.  You made it sound like there are certain people secretly working in concert towards ruling the planet.  But just for giggles, who would Kissinger, Soros, and Zuckerberg accept the role from?
Phil Greenough Added Jul 5, 2017 - 8:34am
I’m curious to know, how is it possible for leaders of the world to discuss world affairs without people like yourself accusing all these leaders of being operatives of the Deep State? 
Katharine Otto Added Jul 5, 2017 - 10:26am
We are all products of our times.  History, not conspiracy, has brought us to this point, because people believe they need leaders.  Blame the Masons. Blame the religions, the empire builders, the institutions, the governments.  All "conspired" to convince others--one way or another--that their way was the best, and woe to you if you resisted.  
Since we live in a culture that believes in winners and losers, we have lots of people who want to side with the presumed "winners."  These would be the New World Order advocates, who wield delegated power with other people's resources or money, obtained by hook or crook.  Their methods, since they are not free agents, are to spread responsibility and risk so that no one person is accountable for the outcome.  We are seeing that in international politics now, with blame shifting the name of the game.  These "leaders" are rendering themselves ever more ridiculous and irrelevant.  Eventually, maybe regular people will wake up and realize they don't need "leaders" to survive, and these "leaders" should find something more useful to do.
George N Romey Added Jul 5, 2017 - 12:09pm
I agree Katherine the New World Order would be made up of the planet's most wealthy and influential.  However, the Deep State is very fragmented with different views and ideas.  My hunch is that multiple factions would want to rule the world differently.
Donald Swenson Added Jul 5, 2017 - 1:11pm
I don't view my article as assuming a conspiracy. But what should we call political decisions which happen behind closed doors? Leaders make a decision to bomb Syria (let's say). Leaders decide to implement Agenda 2030 (say initiate carbon credits to pay costs of global warming). What do you want to call political decisions which a Deep State group implements without the approval of the voters? Choose a name other than conspiracy. D
Donald Swenson Added Jul 5, 2017 - 1:15pm
If our Fed initiates another round of QE to manipulate our stock indices, what is a good name for these closed doors decisions? I don't use the word conspiracy in any of my articles. I just call the entire system corrupt. D
George N Romey Added Jul 5, 2017 - 2:51pm
The Fed has been goosing the equity and bond markets for nearly a decade.  QE is just a smidgen of how they have kept this fake economy going.
Donald Swenson Added Jul 5, 2017 - 6:27pm
Yes, George, the Fed is a crime scene in my view. Criminals rule over our monetary system. Your understanding is much superior to most. I agree with Ron Paul "abolish the Fed". D
John G Added Jul 5, 2017 - 7:41pm
You can abolish the fed if you want but you still have to have a department or sun-department to run the payments system, which is the Fed's main task (hand in hand with Treasury). I'd rather the Fed was just an office within Treasury.
Neither of you know what you're talking about. Nor does Ron Paul (the Koch Brothers' spokesmodel).
John G Added Jul 5, 2017 - 7:42pm
That should be sub-department.
Donald Swenson Added Jul 6, 2017 - 12:53am
Yes, John. You have all the correct answers. What planet did you arrive from??? D
George N Romey Added Jul 6, 2017 - 6:34am
Yes Donald John has slammed me because I realize the Fed is an Independent entity, he claims its part of government.
If everyone on WB is so stupid compared to John then why does he continue to post on this site?  John, surely there must be a site somewhere with people as smart as you. Why aren't you on that site?
Oh I get it. You are really just a sad moronic troll.  
Donald Swenson Added Jul 6, 2017 - 12:37pm
The Fed is legally set up as a private corporation. This gives it operational Independence. This also makes it unconstitutional. We need to abolish the Fed. D
Donald Swenson Added Jul 8, 2017 - 1:29pm
Katherine, your comments make sense. The leaders need to step down from any position of authority. This would create some equality within decisions. D
Tamara Wilhite Added Jul 8, 2017 - 11:59pm
The mistake was allowing the executive branch administration at the federal and state level to grow so large - and have regulatory power equal to legislative law - that it rivals the elected officials in power.
And now they are using their power to try to go around the elected government, Trump's administration, whereas Obama tried to use them to go around the laws Congress passed or implement via fiat what Congress wouldn't pass.
Charles Murray wrote about this in "By the People".
Donald Swenson Added Jul 9, 2017 - 12:26am
Tamara: Yes, the trend appears to be 'executive orders' rather than compromise. My sense is that our Congress is now mostly dysfunctional and nothing is going to work. We need to close the system down (gradually) and start over from scratch. This is possible today with our interconnected public. D
John G Added Jul 9, 2017 - 12:44am
Romey, provide evidence that the Fed is not a government agency.
Else you are just blowing hot air you nasty little man.
Donald Swenson Added Jul 9, 2017 - 1:00am
Who appropriates money for the Fed? Does our Congress? Every bureaucracy of our government gets their appropriation (funding) for their needs from our elected Congress. Why does the Fed not get one? Your call, John. D
John G Added Jul 9, 2017 - 2:03am
I've answered the question before Swenson. What is the point wasting my time if you ignore the answer?
You're a fraud. Like Romey, you have no arguments. You have assertions and then rhetorical tactics to avoid having to justify them in any intellectual sense.
Dave Volek Added Jul 11, 2017 - 12:04am
Donald: I believe the American Constitution has developed too many myths "to create the perfect system of governance ever." So it has become  politically incorrect to challenge the Constitution's own history.
Watch me get flamed!
Donald Swenson Added Jul 11, 2017 - 12:50am
Dave: Your history of the events leading to the Constitution were well made in your website. I fully agree that the Constitution is flawed (as a document for today) as it was a document of the times. Today, our situation is much different. We live in a global world which is fully interconnected. Robots and AI rule over commerce. We do need to rethink our values and our collective documents. With the crash of our financial system emerging later in 2017 or 2018, we need to think about a NEW system for all of us. Your enlightenment is necessary for all of us. Keep up the good work. D