For King and Empire
If there is one thing that history teaches us about powerful leaders, it is that they love to conquer more territory. From ancient times to recent centuries, the fruit of such ambition can be found in countless empires, whether it be under Babylonian, Assyrian, Persian, Greek, Roman, Tibetan, Mongolian, Ottoman, Qing, Spanish, Russian, or British rule.
In my previous piece (For King and Country), I discussed the hazards of big government for a nation. But let us take it to the next level and peek at where things are headed when multiple nations across the world are brought under the authority of one governing body.
So why do empires exist? The reasoning is no mystery: kings and statists would gawk at the opportunity to add to their power and make a name for themselves; to control more land, people, and resources — hence they proceed to take what they desire, usually by force. Similarly, it isn’t hard to comprehend their fall: empires are never sustainable; the further they stretch, the less stable they become. Sooner or later, they would get overthrown or crumble under bankruptcy.
There is also something fundamentally wrong about elite men and women being discontent with the reign of their own kingdom, and who work toward a transnational consolidation of power, so as to rise above all else on earth in a manner of pride that challenges the heavens.
The Sky’s the Limit
A quick examination of the account of Babel offers us the origin story of empires.
Now the whole world had one language and a common speech. As people moved eastward, they found a plain in Shinar and settled there.
They said to each other, “Come, let us make bricks and bake them thoroughly.” They used brick instead of stone, and tar for mortar. Then they said, “Come, let us build ourselves a city, with a tower that reaches to the heavens, so that we may make a name for ourselves; otherwise we will be scattered over the face of the whole earth.”
But the Lord came down to see the city and the tower the people were building.
The Lord said, “If as one people speaking the same language they have begun to do this, then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them. Come, let us go down and confuse their language so they will not understand each other.”
So the Lord scattered them from there over all the earth, and they stopped building the city. That is why it was called Babel — because there the Lord confused the language of the whole world. From there the Lord scattered them over the face of the whole earth.
— Genesis 11:1-9 (NIV)
A lot of readers may focus on what the passage reveals about languages, on how this explains human civilisation shifting from a common tongue to linguistic diversity. Nevertheless, it is just as interesting, if not more important to ponder over what the architects behind Babel were trying to achieve when given the opportunity to unify and centralise without any obstruction.
In a nutshell, we are looking at the quintessential humanist project. This was, in honesty, a clear display of what happens when people think they can do it all, and that not even God can stop them.
You’d have heard of the popular phrase: the sky’s the limit. Drunk with self-confidence, these impudent builders of Babel formed an alliance in their attempt to reach for the skies, literally!
It is said that the word “Babel” sounds like the Hebrew for “confused”, pertaining to the breakdown of communication. However, its etymology also highlights a connection to Akkadian, which was the native language of the Mesopotamian empires: Babel (bab-ilu) meaning “gate of god”, while Babylon (bab-ilani) takes on the pluralistic “gate of the gods”.
The tower, therefore, was intended as an egotistic symbol of collective human agency as the means to achieve self-deification. In other words, the people wanted Babel to serve as a gate — one that led not only into the heavens, but also into godhood. No wonder the Creator intervened by breaking up their unholy collaboration, confusing and scattering them all over the earth.
Enter Globalist Empires
Empires, in the classic sense, are not in fashion. Territorial expansion via military conquest isn’t something that we expect on a huge scale unless maybe World War III kicks off.
So does this ancient, iconic tale of Babel remain relevant to us in the present day? Are there any “projects” we see in the world that resemble its aspiration?
The answer is yes. In this era of humanity, we have been tossed around by yet another political tidal wave sweeping across the nations of the earth. It is a formidable force known as globalisation.
The disembedding of customs and traditions from their local context is a hallmark of globalist infiltration. This leads to a country’s culture being diminished, its autonomy challenged, its systems hijacked, and its national identity diluted or — worse still — despised by its own citizens.
Sooner or later, we realise that there is more than one way to be conquered.
To get a sense of the globalist endgame, I hereby give mention to three globalisations operating within our world today. These are but quick overviews that invite further investigation. For now though, may they be adequate for pointing us in the general direction of concern.
Starting from the West, the globalisation we are most familiar with runs on an economic engine housed by the central banking system that occupies nearly every nation on earth.
In many cases, these federal money suppliers lend printed money not backed by actual resources (precious metals like gold) to the government, charging interest in the process. Engaging in this fractional reserve scheme via fiat money is, by nature, similar to counterfeiting. Countries may temporarily benefit from a cash flow increase, but would inevitably slide back to debt and inflation.
Economists could offer numerous excuses for this system, but it has come to attention that it wasn’t ever meant to be sustainable, and we are on the verge of the breaking point.
During the past year, the World Economic Forum has become the herald of something called the Great Reset. As a global intervention program, it seeks to entice the masses with debt forgiveness, while nonchalantly stating that the world would transform into a “progressive utopia” where happiness comes in tandem with the loss of privacy and ownership rights.
Whether it’s an organisation like the World Economic Forum or an institution like the Bank for International Settlements, nations and states caught within this cunning web of globalisation cannot easily escape the consolidation of economic and banking power pouncing from above.
By design, a few financial elite families at the top of the pyramid assert control over the entire monetary system. While the average person may complain about greedy corporations that make lots of money, the bankers in charge understand that it’s far more superior to produce money, and to “sell” it as the product. Make no mistake — they conspire as a cartel with a totalitarian bent.
Gaze and weep at this quote from the patriarch of one of the most dominant banking dynasties:
Give me control over a nation’s currency, and I care not who makes its laws.
— Mayer Amschel Rothschild
Western globalisation also manifests a bureaucratic front through intergovernmental organisations like the United Nations and the European Union. Similar to the banking pyramid structure, such groups operate as the government of governments. Complications are exacerbated not only due to the sheer size of these unions, but also that their leaders aren’t elected by the people. Sitting high up in their proverbial tower and lacking in accountability, these globalists crush the sovereignty of its member states, while leaving the common man feeling unrepresented and irrelevant.
And it doesn’t help that these organisations have a propensity to impose master plans over everyone else (e.g. UN’s Agenda 2030), claiming that our obedience would result in peace, security, and sustainability. Manmade climate change has long been the go-to issue to fuel their directives. But for all the alarmism and talks of extinction, the “solutions” tend to circle around endless taxes and restrictions, as they strive for total control over every aspect of human society.
You don’t need to believe in the Illuminati to sense that there is something fishy going on here.
As we gaze toward the East, a highly-driven Chinese globalisation has clearly entered the fray in the past decade. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is no stranger to power. Yet after the rise of President Xi Jinping, China has taken its quest for global reach to the next level with the Belt and Road Initiative (introduced in 2013), which has become the centrepiece of their foreign policy.
Arguably one of the largest development plans in modern history, the project focuses on establishing two main trade routes: on land, it aims to link China’s underdeveloped hinterland to Europe through Central Asia and the Middle East (Silk Road Economic Belt); and by sea, it seeks to connect China’s southern provinces to Southeast Asia, the Indian subcontinent, East Africa, as well as the Pacific region (21st Century Maritime Silk Road).
Whether they are building roads and railways or buying up shipping ports, the Belt and Road Initiative isn’t about mere financial investment of infrastructure. In the long term, the enterprise signifies China’s attempt at reconfiguring the political and economic world around Beijing as the central authority. Strategically speaking, they do this by acquiring significant stakes in offshore assets and cultivating such strong economic ties with other countries so as to align their political interests with the vision of the CCP.
Australia is most definitely not off the hook.
For the record, I have nothing against trading goods and services with a foreign entity; this is what comes naturally from diplomacy. Real concerns arise when we realise that China is buying up millions of acres of Australian soil, in addition to important infrastructure and companies. Nowadays, we see Chinese ownership over our agricultural lands and stations, coal mines, wind farms, water supplies, airports, seaports, technological resources, and more.
It is no doubt that part of the blame falls on Australians for being willing sellers of our own country. But when we do refuse a deal, China accuses us of protectionism — quite ironic considering the CCP itself implements way stronger protectionist trade policies. This was the case back in 2016, where Scott Morrison (then serving as the federal treasurer) blocked the sale of 50.4% of NSW’s electricity grid to two Chinese companies, citing national security issues.
In that same year, however, a formalised deal granted partial ownership of the Port of Melbourne to Chinese investment. Premier Daniel Andrews later signed up Victoria for inclusion into the Belt and Road Initiative, as they became the only state in the country to do so. Subsequently, they formulated plans to procure high-capacity metro trains from Changchun Railway Vehicles (subsidiary of Chinese state-owned CRRC), a manufacturer linked to forced Uighur labour. Our federal government has since put a halt to China’s advance, but we can only wonder: for how long?
In late 2020, an unprecedented database leak exposed two million CCP members embedded inside some of the West’s biggest companies, universities, and government agencies. These members answer to the Party, as they continue to infiltrate established systems for China’s globalist dream.
The rise of Islam (since the 7th century) through the prophet Muhammad and his followers led to the creation and expansion of a vast empire that — at the height of its power — spanned from India to the Atlantic Ocean. The earthly ambition of this major religion remains evident in history.
People may assume all of that belongs in the past; that the Islam of today has evolved into a religion of peace without further political entanglements. While nonviolent Muslim worshippers do exist (especially in the West, inclusive of those who approach with a postmodern disposition), we still shouldn’t be naïve and think that their avoidance of conflict in certain contexts negates a globalist agenda shaped around how Muhammad waged jihad throughout his life under Allah’s command.
It helps to understand the three forms or stages of jihad as I shall outline below.
In the earlier days, Muhammad waged stealth jihad when Muslims were but a minority in the city of Mecca. They preached monotheistic beliefs, but also displayed a level of outward tolerance.
Say, “O disbelievers.
I do not worship what you worship.
Nor do you worship what I worship.
I do not serve what you serve.
Nor do you serve what I serve.
You have your way, and I have my way.”
— Quran 109:1-6
Once relocating to the city of Medina, Muhammad was then able to grow the Muslim community into a size that allowed for defensive jihad. Unfortunately, this included physical retaliation against mere verbal critics of Islam — not the sort of “defence” we are most familiar with. They weren’t yet powerful enough to dominate a nation, but could surely put up a fight, exert political pressure, and even raid some caravans as they struggled for resources.
Ultimately, the Muslims established themselves as the most supreme force in the region, unleashing offensive jihad. So they fought to subjugate multiple nations and peoples under the religiopolitical endgame of Islam. The commands given by Allah during this phase pulled no punches:
When the Sacred Months have passed, kill the polytheists wherever you find them. Capture them, and besiege them, and lie in wait for them at every ambush. But if they repent, and perform the prayers, and pay the alms, then let them go their way.
— Quran 9:5
Fight those who do not believe in God, nor in the Last Day, nor forbid what God and his Messenger have forbidden, nor abide by the religion of truth — from among those who received the Scripture — until they pay the due tax, willingly or unwillingly.
— Quran 9:29
O Prophet! Strive against the disbelievers and the hypocrites, and be stern with them. Their abode is hell — what a miserable destination!
— Quran 9:73
These telling quotes of the Quran come from its 9th surah, which stands as the second-to-last chapter out of 114 in the entire book when ordered chronologically. I mention this because in Islamic teaching, the doctrine of abrogation dictates that when Muslims are faced with competing instructions relating to one topic (e.g. how to treat non-Muslims), they are to check with history: whatever is revealed later is said to abrogate (or cancel) earlier commands. By such logic, the verses above constitute part of Muhammad’s final marching orders for all adherents of Islam.
Nonetheless, we see all three stages of jihad at play in the current era — stealth jihad waged in Australia and America (emphasis on peace and victimhood); defensive jihad waged in parts of Africa (Nigeria, Ethiopia, Mozambique, etc.) and Europe (like France with the Charlie Hebdo shooting); offensive jihad waged in parts of the Middle East (continued dominance in Saudi Arabia, as well as more recent mobilisations such as that of the Islamic State). Depending on the context, not all Muslim communities are in the position to engage in offensive jihad, but we can still reasonably expect that to be the long-term goal, if they are truly obedient to their Allah.
Meanwhile, the West can eliminate leaders like Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, but unless they crush the core ideology, Islam’s global jihad would always attract new followers and fighters until the end of time.
The Final Kingdom
So there you have it: three powerful globalisations, each with its own focus, pride, and methodology, yet all of them taking a stand against the Creator; all competing to complete their “Babel” project.
Christian eschatology declares that there will come a time when the whole earth is ruled by one global government. Truth be told, that would require a faction crafty enough to solve the three current globalist threats, and in turn to unite people from all sides. I do observe a force rising to take on this challenge, but that shall be a discussion for another day.
Regardless, we would do well to be watchful of anyone or any group that seeks to dominate the world, whether through political, economic, or religious routes. We should also warn others in love.
Our allegiance to the true King of kings paints a target on our backs. Peaceful noncompliance is wise, but we have no business with violent protests or using the sword to seize earthly authority.
Jesus said, “My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jewish leaders. But now my kingdom is from another place.”
— John 18:36 (NIV)
May we persevere until Christ returns in glory!
May his kingdom reign for all eternity!