Citing its role in weakening the American economy while boosting Communist China’s, U.S. Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) blasted Utopian globalist visions of a “New World Order” and called for abolishing the World Trade Organization (WTO). Writing in an op-ed published by the New York Times, Senator Hawley also pushed for drastic reforms of the global economic system and a return to economic sovereignty. In place of the existing architecture of global governance, the freshman senator from Missouri urged “free nations” to come together and create new “trade deals” to resist “Chinese imperialism.”
The May 5 op-ed, headlined “The W.T.O. Should Be Abolished,” is packed with red meat for conservatives and opponents of globalism. “The global economic system as we know it is a relic; it requires reform, top to bottom,” writes Senator Hawley, who ousted Democrat Claire McCaskill in the 2018 election after an undercover video exposed her anti-gun agenda. “We should begin with one of its leading institutions, the World Trade Organization. We should abolish it.” After giving some background on how Western policymakers hoped to create a “giant, liberal international economy to support a new liberal international order,” he points out that the plan was always to sideline the nation-state and allow capital and people to flow freely across borders.
In the piece, Senator Hawley touts the system that existed during the Cold War. He argues that it upheld national sovereignty and allowed countries to set their own policies. “But in the early 1990s, with America’s principal adversary gone, Western policymakers were in a messianic frame of mind,” the senator from Missouri wrote. “President George H.W. Bush promised a ‘new world order’ of ‘open borders, open trade … and open minds,’ a new international system based on liberal values to bring peace to the world. He and other internationalists wanted a new economic system to match.”
But instead of bringing peace, Hawley points out that “internationalists,” whom Trump has blasted as “globalists,” “embroiled America in one foreign war after another.” Meanwhile, on the economic front, the globalist new order produced economic devastation in America as production and jobs were shipped overseas — all while “enriching Communist China.” In particular, the WTO handicapped America’s economy and ability to protect itself, while allowing Beijing to “maintain trade barriers and protectionist workarounds.” It did nothing to stop Chinese theft of U.S. intellectual property, while forcing American workers to compete against Chinese forced labor, Hawley complained.
While Hawley makes no mention of it, this was all by design, as globalists have made clear over the years in their praise and support for Beijing. The late globalist banker David Rockefeller, for instance, wrote a 1973 op-ed in the same New York Times praising the “social experiment” under the “leadership” of mass-murdering Communist dictator Chairman Mao Tse-tung as “one of the most important and successful in human history.” In more recent years, globalist billionaire George Soros has called for Communist China to “own” the “New World Order,” even arguing that it has a “better functioning government than the United States.” Virtually every globalist billionaire you can think of has been gushing over China for years, if not decades.
“Enough is enough. The W.T.O. should be abolished, and along with it, the new model global economy,” Hawley said, blasting the quest to “turn the world into a liberal order of democracies” using American military might while weakening the U.S. economy. “We must face facts. The only sure way to confront the single greatest threat to American security in the 21st century, Chinese imperialism, is to rebuild the U.S. economy and to build up the American worker. And that means reforming the global economic system.”
Getting out of the WTO is a “start,” Hawley continues. However, the senator the calls on the U.S. government to work with “free nations” and seek “new arrangements” and “new rules” that would “restore America’s economic sovereignty and allow this country to practice again the capitalism that made it strong.” Citing the 50 years before the emergence of the WTO, Hawley calls for creating a “network of reciprocal trade,” striking “new deals that are truly mutual and truly beneficial for America,” returning production to the United States, and building alliances to help “resist Chinese economic imperialism.” In short, after the coronavirus, it is time “to build something better, a better international order and a better economy for a better future for America,” Hawley concluded.
Many, if not most, of the points in Hawley’s column will find strong support among conservatives and constitutionalists. However, there are some potential concerns. Perhaps most important is the fact that globalists themselves have been creating a sort of “Plan B” for years that would establish alternative global institutions such as a “League of Democracies” in case the UN and the current architecture of “global governance” were to collapse. Indeed, most of the globalists pushing for that appeared to be primarily upset that the UN would not support unlimited U.S. government wars and regime change anywhere and everywhere, even though the UN purported to “authorize” virtually every U.S. conflict since WWII.
As The New American reported in May of 2017, neoconservative globalists associated with National Review and the Weekly Standard were the most vocal advocates of creating a new and improved UN for “democracies.” The late U.S. Senator John McCain (R-Ariz.), a liberal globalist often criticized as a Republican in Name Only (RINO), was perhaps the chief promoter of the idea in Congress. Even major leftists and progressives such as globalist Anne-Marie Slaughter have peddled the idea, arguing that it would help promote globalism more effectively than the discredited dictators club that is the UN.
The idea of having “free nations” come together to create the nucleus of a future world government is not new at all. In fact, stretching back to at least the 1940s, globalists were working openly to create a transatlantic union merging the United States and Europe under a single overarching authority along the lines of the European Union. The EU itself was a product of those efforts, with U.S. policymakers realizing that it would be much harder to convince small, sovereign European nations to join a union with the United States unless and until Europe was united under a single transnational regime. The U.S. Central Intelligence Agency and the Marshall Plan after World War II showered funds on this agenda.
As The New American reported in a March 9, 2020, cover story, the agenda to achieve an Atlantic Union is still very much alive, with powerful backing from Deep State swamp creatures in D.C. and beyond. Already, President Trump and EU President Ursula von der Leyen met this year at the World Economic Forum in Davos to announce their plan to finish a “trade deal” between the U.S. government and the European superstate. Before Trump took office, the Obama administration was also scheming to create a major sovereignty-shredding “trade” deal with the EU that would have created supranational governing institutions to regulate Europeans and Americans.
Now, Hawley did not openly advocate any of those ideas — and it’s possible he did not even write the piece himself, so he may not be aware of other agendas. However, the fact that his op-ed was published by the New York Times — the same Deep State propaganda mouthpiece that covered up the Soviet genocide in Ukraine, celebrated Fidel Castro as an anti-communist freedom fighter, painted Mao and his fellow savages as “agrarian reformers” as they butchered their way through China, and so on — is a major red flag. The Times has been one of the leading facilitators of globalist subversion in America and tyranny worldwide.
Another red flag to consider is that on the New American’s Freedom Index, which ranks every member of Congress based on the constitutionality of their voting record, Hawley scored an atrocious 40 percent. Among other bad votes, Hawley voted against tiny spending cuts to the federal budget proposed by Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.), who enjoys a 94-percent ranking on the Freedom Index. The senator from Missouri also voted against an amendment by Paul to strip funding from “global health” schemes. Hawley voted against an amendment to prevent an undeclared (and therefore illegal) war on Iran without a congressional declaration of war, too. And he voted against a resolution to get the U.S. military out of Yemen’s ongoing civil war. For perspective, Republican Senator Mike Lee has a 93-percent score on the index, while Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has an abominable 15 percent over his career. In fairness, Hawley is a freshman, and has plenty of time to improve.
Either way, abolishing the WTO and rejecting the disgraceful institutions of the UN’s “world order” would be a major victory for freedom, common sense, prosperity, and the U.S. taxpayer. However, whether Hawley knows it or not, there may well be an ulterior motive under the surface here. With the UN and the existing “global governance” system completely discredited in the eyes of countless Americans, globalists may simply be seeking to pursue a new and more effective strategy on the road toward what they often refer to as their “new world order.”
Getting rid of the WTO and other outfits would be great. Hopefully Trump, who has already freed America from multiple UN agencies and agreements, will work on that in his second term. But rather than replacing these outfits with new globalist institutions involving socialist and globalist welfare states in Europe or other regions, the Trump administration and Congress should take a page from former Congressman Ron Paul. When asked what he wanted to replace the IRS and the Federal Reserve with, the three-time presidential candidate and medical doctor typically gave a very short answer: “Nothing.”
Trade and commerce among nations are important. But such trade occurred long before sovereignty-killing, globalist “free trade” schemes existed, and would still take place without them. The institutions of global governance such as the WTO (and the UN and the IMF) should be dismantled as quickly as possible. But instead of being replaced with new and improved organizations and schemes, they should be replaced with nothing in keeping with the Founders’ advice to avoid “entangling alliances.”
Photo: AP Images
Alex Newman, a foreign correspondent for The New American, was based overseas for most of his journalism career. He can be reached at [email protected] or through Liberty Sentinel Media. Follow him on Twitter @ALEXNEWMAN_JOU or on Facebook.
Related articles:
“Repeal and Replace” the UN: A False Solution
Next Step to World Government: Atlantic Union
Undercover Video: Sen. McCaskill Would Ban Most Modern Rifles, Has Same Views as Obama
Global Effort Launched to “Repeal and Replace” United Nations
Obama Pushing Trans-Atlantic Union with EU
Creating a New World Order Out of Regional Orders
The Real Agenda Behind the CIA Spawning the EU
