Jimmy Carter was America’s president and the year is 1979. Captain Kirk, Spock, Scotty, and Bones beamed up from television onto the silver screen with Star Trek the Movie. While Captain Kirk was engulfed with the really serious crisis of a malevolent cloud trying to destroy Earth; America, led by “Captain” Carter and his “big government intervention squad,” turned a problem into a catastrophe.
However, as the starship Enterprise journeyed “where no man had gone before,” so too oil prices, and inflation blasted upward into the Exosphere. And with Captain Carter and the BGI Squad on the job, interest rates, hit warp speed and rocketed into alien territory—where no man had gone before (or since)! Unfortunately, “Captain Carter” was not as successful as Captain Kirk; hence the U.S. economy was thrown into the black hole of a three-year recession.
Twenty years hence, “in 1999, the global economy underwent a monumental shift . . . [that] promises to give rise to an inflationary era—the likes of which America has never before seen,” so says Dr. Stephen Leeb. He continues, “this shift was probably the single most significant to occur since America abandoned the gold standard . . . even on Wall Street . . . [few] seem to be aware of this profound change—let alone understand the serious ramifications it is having on the global economy.”
Once again, beginning in 2006, we began to see oil prices soar; up to $3.50 per gallon in some parts of the country by late 2007, Nevertheless, what is happening now with oil is not what was happening thirty years ago. No, this time it is much worse! While oil is once again on stage, the circumstances are markedly different.
This time oil is the chief underlying driver of both geopolitical and geo-economic global events. Unlike in the past, signs of future demand shortages are evident. Keystone supplies are waning and emerging nations like China and India have thrust 3.3 billion new “capitalists” onto the consumerism’s world arena. They are gobbling up TV sets, cell phones, computers, and graduating from bicycles to cars—and they want more.
Globalism and Globalization
The terms globalism and globalization sound harmless. Nonetheless, they are added fuel feeding the flames under an already bubbling cauldron.
Not to get ahead of ourselves we should define the terms. According to the Encarta online dictionary globalism is, “the belief or advocacy that political policies should take worldwide issues into account before focusing on national or state concerns.” In other words, America’s sovereignty is to take a back seat to “worldwide issues”; read United Nations.
Globalization on the other hand is, “to become adopted on a global scale, or cause something, especially social institutions, to become adopted on a global scale.” This is not Black Op Helicopter conspiracy theorism. Globalism is being propelled by a growing bloc of bureaucratic elitists. The impending threat of globalism is and will affect the world both politically and economically.
Unarguably, the economies of all countries are becoming ever more global. That is the world we live in. But how do globalists define globalism? According to Joseph Nye, “Globalism, at its core, seeks to describe and explain nothing more than a world which is characterized by networks of connections that span multi-continental distances. . . . globalization refers to the increase or decline in the degree of globalism. It focuses on the forces, the dynamism or speed of these changes.” The vexing problem for America is that to embrace globalism we must demolish the foundations and core convictions America was built on. In short, globalism ultimately requires we relinquish our national sovereignty and incinerate our founding documents on the altar of Globalism.
Globalism is not new. In 1907, President Woodrow Wilson declared:
Since trade ignores national boundaries and the manufacturer insists on having the world as a market, the flag of his nation must follow him, and the doors of the nations which are closed against him must be battered down. Concessions obtained by financiers must be safeguarded by ministers of state, even if the sovereignty of unwilling nations be outraged in the process.
President Eisenhower affirmed this mind-set in 1953, “a serious and explicit purpose of our foreign policy [is] the encouragement of a hospitable climate for investment in foreign nations.”
Most American’s believe we basically have a two party system. Yes, there is the Libertarian party as well as the Republican and Democratic Parties; the three make up the chief registered, visible parties. But there is an undeclared, shadow party and no I am not talking about one of the radical extremist parties, like the Green party. I believe a large percentage of our politicians are “undeclared globalists.” It seems to be the case that the underlying dynamic driving globalists and globalism are elitist thirsting for power.
The Clintons (remember, we got two for one) ran, and were elected as Democrats; George W. Bush ran, and was elected as a Republican, but in fact they are different facets of the same stone. How was the country really governed in both instances? What America actually got were Globalists. The Clintons were and are Global Socialists/Marxists. Bush, on the other hand, is a Global Socialist/Capitalist. That may sound oxymorononic, but consider the facts. The U.S. government under Bush’s watch grew more than even under the Clinton regime, he has pushed for a North American Union, and has repeatedly pushed back against his constituents pleas to seal our borders.
Let me be clear, George Bush was, that is to say, George Bush is not a conservative; though that is why many of us voted for him—twice! Remember shortly after 911 George Bush stood on a pile of WTC rubble, his arm around a fireman and declared to America he would do whatever it took to fight terrorism. He would fight it wherever he found it—and not just terrorists, but all of those who fund or support terrorism.
Sadly, that has not been the case. Bush instead has fallen prey to both a metaphysical pluralism and religious pluralism. If Bush was really committed to those words, he would seal the borders for national security. He never did. So aliens of unknown origin and intentions flood through by the thousands daily.
The analogy of the Thresher is an apt metaphor for the U.S. and the American Church. Like any analogy it is a broad-stroke; there are individual churches that are striving to follow Christ as closely as possible. There are groups, organizations, and families that understand and live our Founders’ vision.
I have set out three critical stress points pressing in with such force as to warrant our immediate attention. Individually each poses a threat of the highest moment. Jointly, well jointly our peril is so grave that only by God’s intervention will victory be gained. But that situation is often, I should say characteristically where God puts His people before He intercedes. For all glory belongs to God.
The three threats are:
- The atheistic, naturalists’ indoctrination (political correctness)
- Islamofascist imperialism
- Geopolitical agenda of globalization/globalism.
Unfortunately, these cankers are deeply embedded. They will not be easily eradicated. Indeed, at best we can only accomplish two things. First, buy our patient more time. Second, be faithful to our country’s founding documents and to Christ’s mandate to His Church (Matt. 28: 18-20; 1 Pet. 3:15; Jude 1: 3).
I will detail more about these threats. The following chapter explains why and how our atheistic society became that way. Chapter 4 will discuss the imperialistic ambitions of Islam and Chapter 5 will make clear why globalization exposes us to great risk. Remember the three do not work alone. Their force is cumulative and exponential. The functional amalgamation of Islam’s global imperialism and the globalization of America along with the postmodern bent of society have set the stage for a cataclysmic upheaval.
Why go into such detail? Because I belief it is imperative to demonstrate the peril facing our country and the Church and fully illuminate the urgency of the matter. To be successful, I believe this must be driven by the Church.
 Leeb holds bachelor’s degree in Economics from the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School of Business, a master’s degree in Mathematics, and Ph.D. in Psychology from the University of Illinois. Leeb is the author of six books on investments and financial trends, as well as the founder and editor of a number of financial newsletters.
 Stephen Leeb, ed., The Income Performance Newsletter, Winter (New York: Emerging Advisory LLC, 2008), 1.
 Joseph Nye received his bachelor’s degree from Princeton University. Subsequently, he did postgraduate work at Oxford University on a Rhodes Scholarship and earned his PhD in political science from Harvard. was Dean of the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University from 1995 to 2004 and has authored a number of books.
 Joseph Nye, “Globalism Versus Globalization,” The Globalist (Washington DC: The Globalists, 2000-2007), http://www.theglobalist.com/StoryId.aspx?StoryId=2392
 Metaphysical Pluralism posits that there are multiple realities, e.g. there is no absolute truth—what is true for me may not be true for you.
 Religious pluralism, simply stated is inclusive of all religious beliefs. All roads lead to “heaven” or the “Ultimate Being,” however he/she is conceived.