30

Do secret societies that wish to bring about a new world order still exist? Who are they, what evidence points to their existence today, and what are their overall goals? Also, who are the foremost experts on secret societies?

This question originates from a reporter seeking to find experts to appear on a popular, syndicated morning radio program at 6:00 am (Central) on Thursday, May 5. If we cannot recommend an expert from the Stack Exchange community, the next best thing would be to point him to our collective knowledge and research.

FYI - The program is called The Mancow Muller Radio Show, the No. 4 radio program in the country, with an average of 11 million-12 million listeners daily. The show can be heard in 200-plus markets, and segments are often replayed on FOX News.

Sklivvz
  • 78,578
  • 29
  • 321
  • 428
Eric Sokolsky
  • 715
  • 7
  • 8
  • 22
    They are so secret that there is no evidence pointing to their existence. And do not forget, they rule and censor the internet, therefore even if there would be an evidence, you could not see it here. – Suma Apr 26 '11 at 14:54
  • Way back when Jimmy Carter was running for president, there were mainstream articles to the effect that he was part of the "Trilateral Commission" and that his election would usher in the New World Order... You can see where that went.. – M. Werner Apr 26 '11 at 15:22
  • "still exist?"? your assuming that these groups ever existed. I don't think any serious secret-society puts the words "world-domination" into their charter or by-laws. – Mark Rogers Apr 26 '11 at 16:40
  • 1
    **Please note:** Eric works with StackExchange, inc. to help us with PR. – Sklivvz Apr 26 '11 at 16:40
  • 1
    They certainly do exist. Do they have at least resemblance of power needed to achieve their goal? Now thats entirely different question ;) –  Apr 26 '11 at 16:41
  • 13
    yeah me and buddy have a secret society and we want to rule the world, there ya go, QED – erikthebassist Apr 26 '11 at 18:43
  • It's such a broad question. I could lay out the most credible organizations, but it's more a matter of psychology, with people investing in groups like the Trilateral Commission and Council on Foreign Relations or the Bilderburg group the ability to control the world, no matter what the facts are. – Scott Hamilton Apr 26 '11 at 19:42
  • 4
    How much change is necessary to qualify as a new world order? There are lots of committees who clearly want to change things at least a little -- they usually go by names like "committee to elect XXX as YYY". For that matter, I have the "committee to make Jerry Coffin rich." That hasn't been terribly successful yet, but would be a pretty serious change! :-) –  Apr 27 '11 at 04:58
  • If they really existed and were as powerful as claimed, why are there so many people holding on to conspiracy theories about them? Wouldn't all those people "disappear" quietly, or be brainwashed into believing nothing was going on? I'd say the very existence of the conspiracy theories shows that the conspiracy theorists are wrong :) – jwenting Apr 27 '11 at 06:54
  • 2
    p.s. what to consider an "expert" on secret societies? It'd have to be either a conspiracy theorist who claims to have "uncovered conspiracies", which no doubt would go down well with a radio show as it's juicy but wouldn't I think be what we wanted to portray ourselves as, or someone whose claim to fame is that he's levelheaded enough to realise that a secret society is secret only as long as only its members know about it and thus can't tell anything, making for a very short interview. – jwenting Apr 27 '11 at 10:55
  • 5
    @ ErikTheBassist: unless you and your buddy is listed in some sort of scientific peer-reviewed catalog of secret societies, it doesn't count. This is skeptics site, unsourced anecdotal evidence is not welcome! ;) –  Apr 27 '11 at 14:27
  • The real secret societies pulling the strings are now the boardroom of the mega companies. They tell the politicians how high to jump. – Craig Apr 28 '11 at 23:36
  • I thought Anthony Sutton's books were good. Wikipedia has a summary. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antony_C._Sutton One man's coincidence is another man's evidence. Alex Jones is the most well known conspiracy theorist. Certainly you've heard of him. – iterationx Apr 28 '11 at 21:45
  • 2
    @Sejanus: and if he were listed in the scientific peer-reviewed catalog, it would no longer be secret, therefore no secret societies exist. QED – beetstra May 04 '11 at 14:14
  • Does the [Project for a New American Century](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Century) count, or were they insufficiently secretive for your tastes? – Shadur Dec 04 '18 at 08:23

2 Answers2

23

We know that such societies exist because many have become exposed.

For historical examples, consider the Freemasons, Illuminati or the Ku Klux Klan. All were, at some point, influential (more or less) secret societies consisting of people with common aims and traditions. The Wikipedia articles on these are actually very well sourced and provide a good summary.

It is well documented that some of these structures have survived until today, and even remain influential, such as the infamous P2 (Propaganda Due) Lodge (source: David Yallop, In God’s Name). The existence of P2 has also been documented in press (where it was referred to as “a state within a state”).

The exposure of P2 in 1981 revealed the membership of many influential politicians – among them Silvio Berlusconi1) – and unearthed plans “for a consolidation of the media, suppression of trade unions, and the rewriting of the Italian Constitution.” (Wikipedia; Tobias Jones, The Dark Heart of Italy).

More recently, the Christian terrorist group Hutaree was exposed in the USA, along with their aim to stage a small-scale coup d'état (source: BBC).

There is also the fear that the deregulation of the mass media market has led to a de facto control of the public opinion by very few people (who would constitute a not-so-secret society). A rigorous examination of the situation in the USA is undertaken in the film Orwell Rolls in His Grave (online video, Wikipedia article).

… so yes, secret societies “that wish to bring about a new world order” did exist, some until very recently, and there is no reason to suspect that they suddenly ceased to exist.

There are of course numerous allegations and conspiracy theories about secret societies that aren’t corroborated by facts. Being conspiracy theories, there isn’t much chance of disproving them conclusively, and nary a chance (other than by sheer coincidence) of them being true.

1) Berlusconi’s membership receipt:

It is also worth noting that in many countries the political elite is a very tightly knit group of people. For instance, in France many of the top politicians went to the same University – Sciences Po – and knew each other even before that, sometimes through family ties. In Germany, most conservative politicians belong to tightly knit fraternities (“Studentenverbindung”). This of course means that without the right connections it is hard to gain footing in politics.

But none of this is secret, let alone constituting secret societies. It is also, as far as I know, entirely uncontroversial. For that reason I can’t be bothered to research references. The remark serves more as an “FYI”.

Community
  • 1
Konrad Rudolph
  • 12,427
  • 3
  • 56
  • 84
  • 1
    The KKK and especially the Freemasons aren't secret societies at all, they operate in the open (heck, the Freemasons even give guided tours of some of their lodges). While some of the things they do aren't open to outsiders, they're not as organisations secret. – jwenting Apr 27 '11 at 10:51
  • "For instance, in France many of the top politicians went to the same University" Same in the Netherlands and the US, probably in many countries. Not surprisingly in the Netherlands, the most publicly reviled politicians didn't come from those backgrounds (Pim Fortuyn and Geert Wilders for example). – jwenting Apr 27 '11 at 10:52
  • 3
    @jwenting About the secrecy of KKK and Freemasons: hence my qualification “more or less secret”. But these societies *were* secret initially and/or at intervals throughout the period of their existence (e.g. P2). Furthermore, they *called themselves* secret societies. About the politicians: I imagine it’s the same pretty much everywhere. I can only speak confidently for France and Germany since I’ve had a political education in those two systems. – Konrad Rudolph Apr 27 '11 at 10:55
  • 2
    A friend of mine who is a freemason says that at this point the are "an organization with secrets" but he makes no secret of his membership. – Zachary K Apr 27 '11 at 12:53
  • @Zach Agreed: modern freemasons even have websites. Not very secret. ;-) – Konrad Rudolph Apr 27 '11 at 13:08
  • Some of the details of the ritual are more or less secret but the organization as whole is quite open. – Zachary K Apr 27 '11 at 13:30
  • @Konrad, your answer is updated, in Italy we now have the [P3](http://corrieredelmezzogiorno.corriere.it/campania/media/fissi/pdf/ordinanza_shock.pdf) (Italian). ;-) – Sklivvz Apr 27 '11 at 15:35
  • 3
    "Christian terrorist group Hutaree"???? We are talking about 9 guys (if I recall, some/most of them related to each other) who were preparing to fight Apocalypse. Short of BBC's institutional left-wing need to hate on the Christians, what exactly was the idea behing that bullet point? – user5341 Apr 27 '11 at 16:11
  • 2
    Also, from reading about it, "Orwell Rolls in His Grave" is anything but "a rigorous examination of the situation in the USA" - it's a hard left wing fantasy that somehow all of mass media (90% of whom are registered Democrats and give donations to Democrats and openly support Democratic causes) is somehow a right-wing conspiracy. The fact that Bernie Sanders is associated with this may be a minor tipoff. – user5341 Apr 27 '11 at 16:18
  • @Sklivvz - wow... and I thought Italian politics got boring since the Borgias :) – user5341 Apr 27 '11 at 16:20
  • 2
    @DVK I don’t really know what to make of your comments. You seem very hung up on perceived left-wing propaganda. Hutaree are self-proclaimed Christians, and in fact their religious persuasion is all but irrelevant to my point. As for “Orwell Rolls in His Grave”, as far as I recall it, they always cite their sources. It’s been some time since I saw it though. I do remember a left-wing bias but even subtracting that yielded a bleak outlook on press objectivity. Again, it’s irrelevant for the point whether the control comes from the left or the right; and in fact it probably comes from both. – Konrad Rudolph Apr 28 '11 at 00:37
  • 2
    @Konrad - (1) as far as Hutarees specifically, I apologize for being unclear. My point is that by most people's rational standards a family group of 9 nutcases does NOT qualify as "secret society". The only reason to bring them into the topic (and not, say, a random Islamist group) is if you are very hard pressed to find a "Christian"/right-wing secret society, but you really really want to. Again, I note the total abscence of any left-wing ones, or Islamist cells (the latter being a lot more numerous and definitely a lot more realistically dangerous than Hutarees) – user5341 Apr 28 '11 at 01:13
  • 2
    @Konrad - (2) as far as "percieved" - comes from up-close experience with soviet propaganda. I'm VERY VERY good at both reading between the lines and at understanding statist thinking. I'm also very good at knowing just what the ultimate consequences of success of left-wing propaganda is. Ever wonder why an overwhelming number of US immigrants from fUSSR **and** Cuba are somewhat-to-hard right-wing or at least rightish libertarians? (and why none of those socialism-bent Americans like Moore and co ever actually pick up and go live in the wonderful paradise of Cuba?) – user5341 Apr 28 '11 at 01:14
  • 3
    @DVK There are two things here. First, you are apparently terrible at reading between the lines, sorry. Secondly, your criticism of my chosing Hutaree is actually somewhat apt. I was hard-pressed to find a contemporary example of a *military* group. Hutaree differs from Islamist groups by their aim to actually overthrow the local government. This is what qualifies them as a secret society for the goal of this discussion. Islamist terrorists merely want to cause terror in the US, they don’t want to take over government. But in other countries such as Pakistan the situation is very different. – Konrad Rudolph Apr 28 '11 at 12:13
  • 2
    @Konrad - "Hutaree differs from Islamist groups by their aim to actually overthrow the local government." ? That is the goal of MOST of the islamist groups in Islamic countries. To throw out the pro-USA (or not-sufficiently-pro-Caliphate) local bums. Actually, some of the western islamists want the same, they just use different verbiage (they want to impose sharia, but if you think about it, that can't be done without overthrowing local government). – user5341 Apr 28 '11 at 17:41
  • 1
    @DVK - We don't have to "think about it" (which is a silly way to argue since you are essentially asking us to come up with whatever argument makes sense to us instead of making a point that can be argued) Sharia law exists in several countries parallel to the local legal system. For instance in Singapore http://app.syariahcourt.gov.sg/syariah/front-end/SYCHome_E.aspx a country where there's just about zero chance the government will get overthrown and the locals have no desire to do so. It's not stranger than Islamic countries with secular courts (which is just about all of them). – Kit Sunde Apr 28 '11 at 23:12
  • @DVK “That is the goal of MOST of the islamist groups in Islamic countries” – I totally agree. As I said, your point is justified, and I’d love to replace or complement Hutaree by a more suitable example but I’m hard-pressed to find good references about any (exposed) “secret” organisation. – Konrad Rudolph Apr 29 '11 at 08:23
  • If you think that societies for which evidence exists per definition aren't secret than there is no evidence for the existence of secret societies. – Christian Apr 29 '11 at 12:33
  • @Christian Nonsense. The very first sentence of my answer explains that. – Konrad Rudolph Apr 29 '11 at 12:34
  • @KonradRudolph In Germany some right politicans do belong to fraternities . I would however doubt that most of them do. Could you provide a source for that claim? – Christian Dec 26 '12 at 14:21
  • 2
    If attempting to make the world a better place by raising money for charities, helping the sick, helping children who have been burned, helping children that are deformed, striving to be the best person (husband, father, citizen, Christian, Muslim, Jew, etc) means you're trying to make a New world order... then, yes, I guess the Freemasons do that. – Some Freemason Aug 22 '13 at 14:25
  • @Dan Nonsense, I’m not referring to this, but to specific masonic lodges such as P2. – Konrad Rudolph Aug 22 '13 at 15:26
  • @KonradRudolph Why is it that non-Masons always like to tell Masons that they're wrong about Masonry? I am specifically talking about Free and Accepted Masons and not irregular Masonry. It's like saying Christians are all bad. Well... maybe some denominations are not as good as others... – Some Freemason Aug 22 '13 at 15:51
  • @Dan Note how I *nowhere* said or implied that Freemasons are bad. And I didn’t say you were wrong about Freemasons, I said you were wrong about your characterisation of what I wrote. – Konrad Rudolph Aug 22 '13 at 22:57
  • 1
    @KonradRudolph my point is, P2 was unchartered for a reason. Because they do / did not conform to what Freemasonry is. They do not represent us. If you're specifically and ONLY speaking of P2, please consider referring to them and not masonry. At least distinguish them as "irregular". http://www.masonicinfo.com/p2_lodge.htm – Some Freemason Aug 23 '13 at 12:18
3

What's the meaning of the phrase "New world order"? The first world war was eve of the historical period of the long 19th century. A lot of people thought that it was a bad idea that the European nation states were constantly waging war against each other.

Woodrow Wilson called for a "New world order". He called for the foundation of a league of nations in which different nation should come together to be more peaceful. The cosmopolitan idea. Nation states were supposed to become less powerful.

Even before the Second World War people like Gustav Stresemann wanted to have more European integration. At the time there was a strong nationalist sentiment and European integration didn't happen.

The Second World War happened. Some people said: "Enough, we have to stop those nation states from waging war against each other". They had a problem. The French were pretty nationalistic and weren't fond of the idea of being governed by a parliament that had some German parliamentarians. There was no way you could convince the French public to accept something like the current European parliament.

It was better to go one step at a time. The French prime minister and foreign minister Schuman proposed in 1950 the European Coal and Steel Community.

A lot of people who were in favor of cosmopolitan ideas like European integration and transnational partnership started 1954 to meet in Bilderberg. The Bilderberg group started yearly meetings that are always held at different locations. Most people who are members of the group are pretty cosmopolitan and think that European integration was a great idea.

A lot of them subscribe to the principles that are currently know as Washington consensus. If you are a hardcore nationalist than you might want to label those ideas as New World Order.

Christian
  • 33,271
  • 15
  • 112
  • 266
  • A group with a Wikipedia page is hardly *secret* though :-) Is there anything else you wanted to add here? It's being flagged as not an answer... – Sklivvz Dec 27 '12 at 00:26
  • 1
    @Sklivvz : (1) I think it's valuable to have an answer that explains the notion of "New World Order". The other answer doesn't address the term at all. (2) Any powerful group for which citable evidence exists has a Wikipedia page. (3) I could add something about the Bohemian Grove. – Christian Dec 27 '12 at 16:27
  • 1
    @Sklivvz if it's a page they administer themselves, and with verifiably correct information... If I were a secret society, I'd create websites, brochures, conspiracy theories, all with false imagery of what I really am, in order to put off "the masses" as to what's really going on, the sillier and more ridiculous the better. That way, if real information leaked, nobody'd believe it... – jwenting Dec 10 '13 at 06:26