Arquivo da categoria ‘nova ordem mundial – nova era’

Mulher criada por homossexuais pede que governo proteja verdadeiro matrimônio

1 de maio de 2013

 

Uma mulher canadense que foi criada em família homossexual se dedica agora a auxiliar outras pessoas que atravessam a mesma situação e a pedir aos governos do mundo que protejam o matrimônio entre homem e mulher.

Segundo informa ForumLibertas.ogr, Dawn Stefanowicz vive em Ontario, Canadá, com seu marido de toda a vida e seus dois filhos, aos que educou em casa. Atualmente prepara sua autobiografia e desenvolve um ministério especial desde o sítio web (em inglês)http://www.dawnstefanowicz.org/:

ASSISTA O VIDEO (EM INGLÊS)

Brinda ajuda a outras pessoas que como ela cresceram a cargo de um pai homossexual e foram expostas a este estilo de vida.

Stefanowicz explica no sítio web “como em sua infância esteve exposta a intercâmbios de parelhas gays, jogos nudistas e falta de afirmação em sua feminindade, como lhe feriu o estilo de vida em que cresceu, e oferece ajuda, conselho e informação para outras pessoas que cresceram feridas em torno da ‘família’ gay, um estilo de ‘família’ que ela não deseja a ninguém e que crê que as leis não deveriam apoiar”.

Seu testemunho: 

Em seu relato, Stefanowicz explica que devido a uma enfermidade grave de sua mãe teve de ficar ao cuidado de seu pai homossexual quando ainda era uma criança. “Estive exposta um alto risco de enfermidades de transmissão sexual devido ao abuso sexual, aos comportamentos de alto risco de meu pai e a numerosas parelhas”, relata.

“Incluso quando meu pai estava no que pareciam relações monogâmicas, continuava fazendo ‘cruising’ buscando sexo anônimo. Cheguei a me preocupar profundamente, a amar e entender com compaixão meu pai. Compartilhava comigo o que lamentava da vida. Infelizmente, quando crianças uns adultos abusaram sexual e fisicamente dele. Devido a isto, vivei com depressão, problemas de controle, estalidos de raiva, tendências suicidas e compulsão sexual. Tentava satisfazes sua necessidade pelo afeto de seu pai, por sua afirmação e atenção, com relações promíscuas e transitórias. As (ex) parelhas de meu pai, com os que tratei e cheguei a apreciar com sentimentos profundos, viram suas vidas drasticamente encurtadas pela AIDS e pelo suicídio. Tristemente, meu pai morreu de AIDS em 1991”, recorda.

Segundo Stefanowicz, as “experiências pessoais, profissionais e sociais com meu pai não me ensinaram o respeito pela moralidade, pela autoridade, pelo matrimônio e pelo amor paterno. Me sentia temerosamente silenciada porque meu pai não me permitia falar dele, seus companheiros de casa, seu estilo de vida e seus encontros nessa subcultura. Enquanto vivi em casa, tive que viver segundo suas regras”.

“Sim, amava meu pai. Mas me sentia abandonada e desprezada porque meu pai me deixava sozinha para ficar vários dias com seus parceiros. Suas parelhas realmente não se interessavam por mim. Fui machucada por maltrato doméstico homossexual, as tentativas sexuais com menores e a perdida de parelhas sexuais como se as pessoas fossem só coisas para se usar. Busquei consolo, busquei o amor de meu pai em diversos namorados a partir dos 12 anos”, sustenta.

Stefanowicz recorda que “desde cedo, me expôs a conversas sexualmente explícitas, estilos de vida hedonistas, subculturas GLBT e lugares de férias gay. O sexo me parecia gratuito quando crianças. Me expus a manifestações de sexualidade de todo tipo inclusive sexo em casas de banho, travestismo, sodomia, pornografia, nudismo gay, lesbianismo, bissexualidade, voyeurismo e exibicionismo. Se aludi ao sadomasoquismo e se mostravam alguns aspectos. As drogas e o álcool contribuiam a baixar as inibições nas relações de meu pai”.

“Meu pai apreciava o vestir unisex, os aspectos de gênero neutro, e o intercâmbio de roupas quando tive 8 anos. Eu não via o valor das diferenças biologicamente complementárias entre homem e mulher. Nem pensava acerca do matrimônio. Fiz votos de não ter nunca filhos, porque não cresci em um ambiente seguro, sacrificial, centrado nas crianças”, assinala.

As consequências: 

“Mais de duas décadas de exposição direta a estas experiências estressantes me causaram insegurança, depressão, pensamentos suicidas, medo, ansiedade, baixa autoestima, insônia e confusão sexual. Minha consciência e minha inocência foram seriamente danificadas. Fui testemunha de que todos os outros membros da família também sofriam”, sustenta Stefanowicz.

Ela assegura que só depois de ter tomado as decisões mais importantes de sua vida, começou a dar-se conta de como a tinha afetado crescer neste ambiente.

“Minha cura implicou em mirar de frente a realidade, aceitar as consequências a longo prazo e oferecer perdão. Podem imaginar ser forçados a aceitar relações instáveis e práticas sexuais diversas desde muito pequena e como afetou meu desenvolvimento? Infelizmente, até que meu pai, suas parelhas sexuais e minha mãe morreram, não pude falar publicamente de minhas experiências”, explica.

“Afinal, as crianças serão as vítimas reais e os perdedores do matrimônio legal do mesmo sexo. Que esperança posso oferecer a crianças inocentes sem voz? Governos e juizes devem defender o matrimônio entre homem e mulher e excluir todos os outros, pelo bem de nossas crianças”, conclui.

Fonte: CBN.com /

Site da Stefanowicz http://www.dawnstefanowicz.org/

A destruição da Família – Objetivo número 1 dos politicamente corretos

3 de dezembro de 2012

Isso você não lê na Falha de S. Paulo – Grupo CLUB Bilderberg – As reuniões secretas de banqueiros, políticos e jornalistas

15 de novembro de 2012

GRUPO SECRETO DE BANQUEIROS, POLÍTICOS E JORNALISTAS DECIDEM O FUTURO DO MUNDO, passando por cima dos governos e das soberanias nacionais e você nem fica sabendo disso:

Alguns gatos pingados protestam na Itália, com o Primeiro Ministro participando de reuniões secretas em Roma.

Action de Giovane Italia contre une réunion du groupe Bilderberg

Posté par pat le 14 novembre 2012

Recherche: jeunesses nationalistes

Action de Giovane Italia contre une réunion du groupe Bildeberg

ROME (NOVOpress) — Hier, les militants romains de Giovane Italia, la structure jeune du PdL (le Parti de la Liberté, issu de l’union entre Forza Italia de Silvio Berlusconi et les ex-MSI devenus Alliance Nationale), ont fait irruption lors d’une réunion du groupe Bildeberg organisée dans la ville éternelle (tract ci-dessus).

Mis en place rapidement, cette action contre le groupe d’influence mondialiste, qui organise ses réunions dans le plus grand secret (à Rome, il y avait des dirigeants, des banquiers mais également de journalistes…), voulait affirmer que nul ne peut peut piétiner la souveraineté populaire. Notamment les banques. C’est la raison pour laquelle Giovane Italia s’oppose à l’usure et à la financiarisation.

Mais surtout Giovane Italia s’est insurgé contre la présence du président du Conseil italien Mario Monti – pourtant soutenu par le PdL –, l’homme de la Goldman Sachs, lors de cette réunion. “Mario Monti doit faire part de cette réunion au Parlement et indiquer ce qui s’y est dit. C’est une honte qu’un Premier ministre participe à ces réunions secrètes où les banquiers et la technocratie décident de l’avenir des peuples”, a déclaré à la presse Cesare Giardina, président de Giovane Italia Roma.

http://fr.novopress.info/

Gaycracia em Minas Gerais, Para ninguém dizer que PSDB é de direita: GLBTTS podem usar nome de guerra no governo de Minas Aécia Anastasia

17 de outubro de 2011

Travestis e transexuais de Minas vão poder usar nome social em serviços públicos

17/10/2011 16h36
MÁBILA SOARES

http://www.otempo.com.br/noticias/ultimas/?IdNoticia=132575

Travestis e transexuais de Minas Gerais vão poder usar o nome social no âmbito da administração pública direta e indireta. O anúncio foi feito pelo secretário de Estado de Desenvolvimento Social, Wander Borges, durante a abertura da II Conferência Estadual de Políticas Públicas e Direitos Humanos LGBT, realizada nesse fim de semana, no Sesc Venda Nova, em Belo Horizonte.

O decreto 8496, que estabelece a adoção do nome social, foi publicado na edição de sábado (15) do Minas Gerais. O documento foi assinado pelo secretário Wander Borges e pela secretária de Estado de Planejamento e Gestão, Renata Vilhena.

A iniciativa vai possibilitar, por exemplo, a travestis e transexuais serem chamados e identificados pelo nome que se reconhecem e são reconhecidos na sociedade, conforme ocorre com pessoas que são chamadas pelo apelido, como Xuxa e Pelé.

Para a coordenadora Especial de Políticas de Diversidade Sexual, Walkiria La Roche, a medida vai contribuir para diminuir o preconceito e acabar com o constrangimento que travestis e transexuais sofrem, por exemplo, quando vão a uma delegacia.

Conferência
A II Conferência Estadual de Políticas Públicas e Direitos Humanos LGBT reuniu mais de 400 pessoas de várias cidades mineiras e promoveu um debate intenso durante dois dias. Mais de 80 propostas (50 em âmbito estadual e 30 nacional) foram aprovadas e serão apresentadas no encontro nacional, a ser realizado em Brasília.

O inferno é aqui mesmo: Toda nudez será castigada em San Francisco, cidade do pecado. A nudez como um dos direitos humanos

26 de setembro de 2011

=

=

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/26/us/san-francisco-nudity-restrictions-provoke-the-nakedly-ambitious.html?_r=1

A seita Bahá’u'lláh e a Nova Ordem Mundial, Índia e ONU

29 de junho de 2010

Três adeptos de Bahá’u'lláh apareceram na casa de uma colega minha (Curitiba)  tentando convertê-la a aquela religião, de sede na Índia.

Queriam uma hora do tempo dela.

Como ela se recusou, deixaram um panfleto bem curioso com ela.

No panfleto lê-se:

PRINCÍPIOS SOCIAIS NA NOVA ORDEM MUNDIAL 

Alguns princípios sociais fundamentais,  revelados por Bahá u lláh que unirão o mundo são:

 *eliminação de todos os tipos de preconceitos.

 *harmonia essencial da religiao com a ciencia e a razão.

 *educacao universal compulsoria.

 *igualdade de direitos e oportunidades para o homem e a mulher.

 *solucao espiritual dos problemas economicos em base mundial.

*independente pesquisa da verdade.

*a consulta como metodo de decisao grupal.

*um idioma mundial auxiliar.

*eliminacao dos extremos de riqueza e probreza.

*um parlamento mundial.

*uma corte internacional de justiça com plenos poderes.

*paz mundial, garantida por um corpo executivo mundial.

Algumas imagens:

http://img717.imageshack.us/img717/6703/pict0051v.jpg

http://img683.imageshack.us/img683/5290/pict0053xt.jpg

http://img517.imageshack.us/img517/2429/pict0054d.jpg

uma análise do WSJ sobre Irã, acordos, armas para terroristas, petróleo e bomba

19 de maio de 2010

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704912004575252293191736482.html?mod=WSJ_newsreel_world

Negros defendem fim do Dia do Mestiço

23 de junho de 2009

 O I Encontro da População Negra e das Comunidades de Terreiro de Roraima, realizado de 15 a 16 de setembro em Boa Vista, aprovou Carta que defende “Instituição do 20 de novembro como feriado Municipal/ Estadual e Federal e pelo fim do dia do mestiço criado no Estado do Amazonas e em Roraima”. A Carta está disponível no site do Governo Lula: https://www.planalto.gov.br/Consea/static/documentos/Outros/Carta_Roraima.pdf

A moda de casamento gay já chegou à África

20 de março de 2009

Essa vem do El Pais de madrid.
=
“No sólo la Iglesia católica es contraria al matrimonio entre personas del mismo sexo. La anglicana, al menos en África, también se muestra contraria. A las amenazas de un cisma por el ordenamiento de un obispo gay, el prelado de Nigeria Peter Akinola ha añadido una amenaza mucho más general.
En una carta enviada a los parlamentarios en la que pide que se ilegalice la posibilidad de que los gays y lesbianas se casen, Akinola añade que quienes asistan a una de estas ceremonias -aunque sean simbólicas- sean castigados con un año de cárcel. Los contrayentes deberán pasar cinco años en prisión, según el obispo. “El mismo matrimonio homosexual, aparte de ser impío, es antibíblico, poco natural, no rentable, malsano, incultural y antinigeriano. Esto es una perversión, una desviación y una aberración que es capaz de engendrar el holocausto moral y social en este país”, dice la carta del obispo.”

Gorbachev e a nova ordem mundial

8 de março de 2009

WHAT NEXT?

A new international agenda

<!–
document.writeln(‘

‘);
–>

The year 2008 has been indelibly marked by the global financial crisis. No one predicted its outbreak or its scale; I don’t think anyone knows when and how it might end.

It is already clear that initial reassuring statements about it were irresponsible. In the coming months, the world, and world politics, will be severely tested.

Searching for ways out of the crisis will be a difficult, agonizing process. Not all early efforts were effective. This first failure in the functioning of our fully globalized world caught us by surprise, largely unprepared.

As I read the reports from the July Group of 8 summit meeting in Japan, it is amazing that just a couple months before the crisis erupted, world leaders seemed unaware of warning tremors. The summit was a routine gathering. Its very format – the way it was prepared and conducted – seems outdated. We need a new vision of global political leadership, a new willingness to work together in this globalized world. Politicians are lagging behind the events.

The crisis in the Caucasus in early August was a bolt from the blue. Any war, even a short one, is always a failure of politics and policy. The Georgian leadership’s military misadventure spelled disaster for thousands of Ossetians, Georgians and Russians; it also highlighted the absence of an effective security system in Europe for preventing and resolving conflicts.

Trouble hovers over other continents, too. Civil strife in Congo, Sudan and elsewhere in Africa has cost thousands of lives. The terrorist attacks on Mumbai were more than just a tragic reminder of the threat posed by terrorism: They also raised the issue of the responsibility of the state on whose territory this large-scale attack had been prepared. The situation in Afghanistan seems dismal. The Middle East remains a tinderbox. On top of it all, piracy has made a comeback, straight out of the dark ages.

The flows of migrants, social unrest in many countries (including some that are far from poor), the recent problems with contaminated food supplies, massive human rights violations – the list of the world’s ills can go on and on.

There is an increasing sense of a world in turmoil, further aggravated by the crisis of the world economy.

Talking to people in different countries, again and again I hear these questions: What is happening? What is in store? Why have the world’s political leaders failed to address effectively the old and new threats?

These are legitimate questions. To answer them, we must look at the underlying causes of recent events.

I am convinced that the root cause of the current widespread upheaval is the inability and even unwillingness of political leaders to correctly evaluate the situation after the end of the Cold War and jointly chart a new course.

The “winner’s complex” – the fanfare of triumph sounded by the West after the Soviet Union left the international arena – obscured the fact that the end of the Cold War was not a victory for one side or one ideology. It was instead a common achievement and a common challenge, a call for major change.

But why change if, as Western politicians believed, all was fine? They would continue to lead the rest of the world with their unfailing doctrine of free markets and alliances like NATO, which were ready and eager to assume responsibility for peace in Europe and beyond.

Payback came in 2008.

We will likely continue to pay for misguided thinking in the years to come, unless we have the courage to look at things honestly and rethink our approach to world affairs.

Throughout the world, there is a clamor for change. That desire was evident in November, in an event that could become both a symbol of this need for change and a real catalyst for that change. Given the special role the United States continues to play in the world, the election of Barack Obama could have consequences that go far beyond that country.

The American people have had their say; now all will depend on whether the new president and his team measure up to the challenge.

The U.S. presidential election was followed by another consequential event: The G-20 summit meeting in Washington foreshadowed a new format of global leadership, bringing together the countries responsible for the future of the world economy. And more than just the economy is at stake.

In and of itself, the fact that the G-8 leaders were joined as equal partners by the leaders of China, India and Brazil and almost a dozen other countries was a recognition, perhaps a reluctant one, that the economic and political balance in the world had changed. It is now a given that a world with a single power center, in any shape or guise, is no longer possible. The global challenge of a financial and economic tsunami can only be met by working together.

A new concept is emerging for addressing the crisis at the national and international levels. The steps now being contemplated seem better suited to the needs of a global world than the previous approach, based on the hope that the market will eventually take care of itself.

If current ideas for reforming the world’s financial and economic institutions are consistently implemented, that would suggest we are finally beginning to understand the importance of global governance. Such governance would render the economy more rational and more humane.

This is a daunting challenge, not only to the world’s economy. Yet it can be met. We need to encourage equitable dialogue, democratize relations among nations and push back militaristic tendencies in politics and thinking. This amounts to a new agenda for international politics.

Mikhail Gorbachev, the last leader of the Soviet Union, is president of the International Foundation for Socio-Economic and Political Studies in Moscow.

Henry A. Kissinger prega a nova ordem mundial

8 de março de 2009

APRÈS LE DÉLUGE

The chance for a new world order

<!–
document.writeln(‘

‘);
–>

As the new U.S. administration prepares to take office amid grave financial and international crises, it may seem counterintuitive to argue that the very unsettled nature of the international system generates a unique opportunity for creative diplomacy.

That opportunity involves a seeming contradiction. On one level, the financial collapse represents a major blow to the standing of the United States. While American political judgments have often proved controversial, the American prescription for a world financial order has generally been unchallenged. Now disillusionment with the United States’ management of it is widespread.

At the same time, the magnitude of the debacle makes it impossible for the rest of the world to shelter any longer behind American predominance or American failings.

Every country will have to reassess its own contribution to the prevailing crisis. Each will seek to make itself independent, to the greatest possible degree, of the conditions that produced the collapse; at the same time, each will be obliged to face the reality that its dilemmas can be mastered only by common action.

Even the most affluent countries will confront shrinking resources. Each will have to redefine its national priorities. An international order will emerge if a system of compatible priorities comes into being. It will fragment disastrously if the various priorities cannot be reconciled.

The nadir of the existing international financial system coincides with simultaneous political crises around the globe. Never have so many transformations occurred at the same time in so many different parts of the world and been made globally accessible via instantaneous communication. The alternative to a new international order is chaos.

The financial and political crises are, in fact, closely related partly because, during the period of economic exuberance, a gap had opened up between the economic and the political organization of the world.

The economic world has been globalized. Its institutions have a global reach and have operated by maxims that assumed a self-regulating global market.

The financial collapse exposed the mirage. It made evident the absence of global institutions to cushion the shock and to reverse the trend. Inevitably, when the affected publics turned to their national political institutions, these were driven principally by domestic politics, not considerations of world order.

Every major country has attempted to solve its immediate problems essentially on its own and to defer common action to a later, less crisis-driven point. So-called rescue packages have emerged on a piecemeal national basis, generally by substituting seemingly unlimited governmental credit for the domestic credit that produced the debacle in the first place – so far without more than stemming incipient panic.

International order will not come about either in the political or economic field until there emerge general rules toward which countries can orient themselves.

In the end, the political and economic systems can be harmonized in only one of two ways: by creating an international political regulatory system with the same reach as that of the economic world; or by shrinking the economic units to a size manageable by existing political structures, which is likely to lead to a new mercantilism, perhaps of regional units.

A new Bretton Woods-kind of global agreement is by far the preferable outcome. America’s role in this enterprise will be decisive. Paradoxically, American influence will be great in proportion to the modesty in our conduct; we need to modify the righteousness that has characterized too many American attitudes, especially since the collapse of the Soviet Union.

That seminal event and the subsequent period of nearly uninterrupted global growth induced too many to equate world order with the acceptance of American designs, including our domestic preferences.

The result was a certain inherent unilateralism – the standard complaint of European critics – or else an insistent kind of consultation by which nations were invited to prove their fitness to enter the international system by conforming to American prescriptions.

Not since the inauguration of President John F. Kennedy half a century ago has a new administration come into office with such a reservoir of expectations. It is unprecedented that all the principal actors on the world stage are avowing their desire to undertake the transformations imposed on them by the world crisis in collaboration with the United States.

The extraordinary impact of the president-elect on the imagination of humanity is an important element in shaping a new world order. But it defines an opportunity, not a policy.

The ultimate challenge is to shape the common concern of most countries and all major ones regarding the economic crisis, together with a common fear of jihadist terrorism, into a common strategy reinforced by the realization that the new issues like proliferation, energy and climate change permit no national or regional solution.

The new administration could make no worse mistake than to rest on its initial popularity. The cooperative mood of the moment needs to be channeled into a grand strategy going beyond the controversies of the recent past.

The charge of American unilateralism has some basis in fact; it also has become an alibi for a key European difference with America: that the United States still conducts itself as a national state capable of asking its people for sacrifices for the sake of the future, while Europe, suspended between abandoning its national framework and a yet-to-be-reached political substitute, finds it much harder to defer present benefits.

Hence its concentration on soft power. Most Atlantic controversies have been substantive and only marginally procedural; there would have been conflict no matter how intense the consultation. The Atlantic partnership will depend much more on common policies than agreed procedures.

The role of China in a new world order is equally crucial. A relationship that started on both sides as essentially a strategic design to constrain a common adversary has evolved over the decades into a pillar of the international system.

China made possible the American consumption splurge by buying American debt; America helped the modernization and reform of the Chinese economy by opening its markets to Chinese goods.

Both sides overestimated the durability of this arrangement. But while it lasted, it sustained unprecedented global growth. It mitigated as well the concerns over China’s role once China emerged in full force as a fellow superpower. A consensus had developed according to which adversarial relations between these pillars of the international system would destroy much that had been achieved and benefit no one. That conviction needs to be preserved and reinforced.

Each side of the Pacific needs the cooperation of the other in addressing the consequences of the financial crisis. Now that the global financial collapse has devastated Chinese export markets, China is emphasizing infrastructure development and domestic consumption.

It will not be easy to shift gears rapidly, and the Chinese growth rate may fall temporarily below the 7.5 percent that Chinese experts have always defined as the line that challenges political stability. America needs Chinese cooperation to address its current account imbalance and to prevent its exploding deficits from sparking a devastating inflation.

What kind of global economic order arises will depend importantly on how China and America deal with each other over the next few years. A frustrated China may take another look at an exclusive regional Asian structure, for which the nucleus already exists in the Asean-plus-three concept.

At the same time, if protectionism grows in America or if China comes to be seen as a long-term adversary, a self-fulfilling prophecy may blight the prospects of global order.

Such a return to mercantilism and 19th-century diplomacy would divide the world into competing regional units with dangerous long-term consequences.

The Sino-American relationship needs to be taken to a new level. The current crisis can be overcome only by developing a sense of common purpose. Such issues as proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, energy and the environment demand strengthened political ties between China and the United States.

This generation of leaders has the opportunity to shape trans-Pacific relations into a design for a common destiny, much as was done with trans-Atlantic relations in the immediate postwar period – except that the challenges now are more political and economic than military.

Such a vision must embrace as well such countries as Japan, Korea, India, Indonesia, Australia and New Zealand, whether as part of trans-Pacific structures or, in regional arrangements, dealing with special subjects as energy, proliferation and the environment.

The complexity of the emerging world requires from America a more historical approach than the insistence that every problem has a final solution expressible in programs with specific time limits not infrequently geared to our political process.

We must learn to operate within the attainable and be prepared to pursue ultimate ends by the accumulation of nuance.

An international order can be permanent only if its participants have a share not only in building but also in securing it. In this manner, America and its potential partners have a unique opportunity to transform a moment of crisis into a vision of hope.

Henry A. Kissinger served as national security adviser and as secretary of state in the administrations of Presidents Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford. Distributed by Tribune Media Services.

A Nova Ordem Mundial – Os 3 pilares e os três inimigos da Civilização ocidental

18 de fevereiro de 2009

=

atgaaaaobgbb2rtdznmdsm9uwd3sqczbioabqo1gain37oucmfe4smw2regxj5fqxvqduqe4vtnqntspao1sxbkbtuk8ajtu9vd_8tfzubwij31bjc52fyznvnrmta

continuação – o homem que quer dominar o mundo

2 de fevereiro de 2009

> Alexander Dugin

Aleksandr Gelevich Dugin (Russian: Александр Гельевич Дугин) (Russian scholar, political activist, and founder of the contemporary Russian school of geopolitics often known as “Eurasianism”. He is often seen to be an advocate of National Bolshevism.

 

 

Dugin worked as a journalist before becoming involved in politics just after the fall of communism. He helped to write the political programme for the newly refounded Communist Party of the Russian Federation under the leadership of Gennady Zyuganov, producing a document that was more nationalist in tone than Marxist.

 

 

Dugin soon began publishing his own journal Elementy which initially began by praising Franco-Belgian neo-fascist Jean_Franois Thiriart. He also sought an alliance with Alain de Benoist although the Frenchman was discouraged by Dugin’s vehement Russian nationalism. Consistently glorifying both Tsarist and Stalinist Russia, Elementy also revealed Dugin’s admiration for Heinrich Himmler and Julius Evola, to name but two. He also played a role in editing the weekly journal Dyen (The Day), a bastion of Russian anti-Semitism. Convinced that National Bolshevism needed its own political movement Dugin talked his close ally Eduard Limonov into leading a new group and so the National Bolshevik Front was born. Dugin then became a prominent member of National Bolshevik Party.

 

 

The Eurasia Party, founded by Dugin on the eve of George W. Bush’s visit to Russia at the end of May 2002, is said by some observers to enjoy financial and organizational support from Vladimir Putin’s presidential office. The Eurasia Party also is supported by the leaders of the Muslim, Orthodox Christian, Buddhist, and Jewish faiths in Russia, and the party hopes to play a key role in attempts to resolve the Iran. Dugin’s ideas, particularly those on “a Turkic-Slavic alliance in the Eurasian sphere” have recently become popular among certain nationalistic circles in Turkey.

 

 

One of the basic ideas that underpin his theories is that Moscow, Berlin, and Paris form a “natural” geopolitical axis, because a line or axis from Moscow to Berlin will pass through the vicinity of Paris if extended). Dugin’s theories foresee an eternal world conflict between land and sea, and hence, Dugin believes, the US and Russia. He says, “In principle, Eurasia and our space, the heartland Russia, remain the staging area of a new anti-bourgeois, anti-American revolution.” According to his 1997 book, The Basics of Geopolitics, “The new Eurasian empire will be constructed on the fundamental principle of the common enemy: the rejection of Atlanticism, strategic control of the USA, and the refusal to allow liberal values to dominate us. This common civilisational impulse will be the basis of a political and strategic union.”

 

 

What has made Dugin notorious is that his thought echoes Hitler’s in certain areas. For example, the second of the party’s principles is “Social Orientation.” This principle begins: “This is a euroasian economy, consisting of capitalism with a national soul and socialistic face”.

 

 

He is talking about capitalism based on a combination of nationalism with socialism: this at least resembles “national socialism”, or Nazism. His theories were banned during Soviet times for their links to Nazism. Nowadays, however, his theories have won broad acceptance within the Communist Party.

 

 

Dugin does have a healthy respect for Judaism. He is, however, anti-Zionist, which he regards as standing in contradiction to basic Talmudic principles. He also views Israel as a “strategic base for [the] militant Atlantism” promoted by the US and Britain.

 

 

Most recently he has criticized the “Euro-Atlantic” involvement in the Ukrainian presidential election as a scheme to create a “cordon sanitaire” around Russia, much like the British attempted after the first world war.

 

 

 

 

Dugin’s works

Absoliutnaia rodina, Arktogeia-tsentr (1999), ISBN 5818600033

Tampliery proletariata: natsional-bolshevizm i initsiatsiia, Arktogeia (1997), ISBN 5859280173

Osnovy geopolitiki: geopoliticheskoe budushchee Rossii, Arktogeia (1997), ISBN 5859280181

Metafizika blagoi vesti: Pravoslavnyi ezoterizm, Arktogeia (1996), ISBN 5859280165

Misterii Evrazii, Arktogeia (1996), ISBN 5859280157

Konservativnaia revoliutsiia, Arktogeia (1994), ISBN 5859280130

A forma oriental coletivista de economia e sociedade moderna

4 de janeiro de 2009

Le journaliste David Brooks explique dans le quotidien International Herald Tribune la différence entre l’individualisme occidental et le collectivisme asiatique. “On peut établir une échelle mondiale avec, d’un côté, les sociétés les plus individualistes – comme les Etats-Unis et la Grande-Bretagne – et, de l’autre, les sociétés les plus collectivistes – comme la Chine et le Japon. … Les sociétés individualistes réussissent généralement mieux sur le plan économique. Notre histoire en Occident a connu le développement de la raison individuelle et de la conscience pendant la Renaissance et le siècle des Lumières mais aussi pendant la période prospère du capitalisme qui a suivi. … Mais … que se passe-t-il lorsque les sociétés collectivistes, particulièrement celles d’Asie, connaissent une véritable croissance économique et concurrencent l’Occident ? Une nouvelle sorte de conversation mondiale prend forme. La cérémonie d’ouverture à Pékin était un communiqué officiel de cette conversation. Elle faisait partie de l’affirmation de la Chine que le développement ne se fait pas uniquement grâce à des moyens occidentaux libéraux mais peut également être favorisé par des moyens orientaux et collectifs. … L’ascension de la Chine n’est pas simplement un événement économique. C’est également un événement culturel. L’idéal d’un collectif harmonieux pourrait bien se révéler aussi attirant que l’idéal du rêve américain. C’est certainement une idéologie utile pour des autocrates ambitieux.” International Herald Tribune, 13 août 2008

nova era conspiração iluminati governo mundial maçonaria treze 13 pontos da nova ordem mundial dos iluminati

12 de dezembro de 2008

http://www.grandorient.org/trezepontos.html 

1° Moeda mundial; 

2° Linguagem universal; 

3° Segurança total (monitoramento e vigilância); 

4° Assistência Social Completa e Contínua (renda mínima, pleno emprego, ensino gratuito, saúde pública); 

5° Desconcentração da renda e poder do Estado (impostos mínimos, colaboradores mínimos, enxugamento); 

6° Igualdade absoluta dos seres: posição social, étnica, econômica, dos costumes, inexistência da autoridade; 

7° Justiça Internacional: repressão total a contravenção, ao crime, a tirania e a corrupção; 

8° Saneamento e Saúde em nível mundial; 

9° Planejamento familiar; 

10° Fim da fome e da miséria; 

11° Liberdade irrestrita de opinião e manifestação; 

12° Moralização do ser: fim da mendicância, da prostituição, do trabalho infantil e demais fatores; 

13° Criação da Polícia e do Exército da Nova Ordem.