© Terry Boardman May 1999   This essay first appeared in New View magazine June 1999

In my article “The Push Towards a New World Order In The 1990s” in the previous issue of ‘New View’ (1), I outlined something of the drive behind an Anglo-American world hegemony that can be traced back to the activities of Cecil Rhodes in the 1890s. Behind this drive, I suggested, lies a spiritual purpose -  to create a uniform world state of unfreedom based on a philosophy of materialism, a state in which freedom would simply not arise, a Brave New World by stealth for which Hitler’s Third Reich was only a stammering and crude  testbed.

The roots of this enterprise are deep. One can look back to the time of Christ when a single state, the Roman Empire, dominated the known world in the West. It died, but its ghost lived on in the Vatican and the structures and attitudes of the Papal Church. The Empire imprinted a powerful image into the collective unconsious of the peoples of the West – “if only we could have again an ordered predictable life with a reasonable and civilised standard of living where we could accept being told what to do by a single leader and allowed to get on with our peaceful comfortable lives with our families and friends.” A thousand years later, that ghost powerfully attempted to revivify itself  as it strove to assert temporal control over Europe’s truculent and troublesome monarchs. The 27 assertions of Dictatus Papae of Pope Gregory VII (1073-85) included the following: “That he [the pope] alone may use the imperial insignia;  That he may depose emperors; That he himself may be judged by no-one.”

One of the ways the imperial ghost sought to extend its power not long after the turn of the first millennium  was by institutionalising the Crusade – which bizarrely united  violent and mercenary ambitions with exalted spiritual passions. Exactly 900 years ago (15 July 1099) the Crusaders on the First Crusade finally succeeded in taking Jerusalem and in their exaltation proceeded to celebrate by slaughtering most of the population. The First Crusade  was the first major assault of “the West” upon “the East” in the Christian era, and two hundred years later, it had become obvious that for the West, “the hostile East” included the Eastern Orthodox Byzantine Empire which saw its capital Constantinople sacked by the forces of the Catholic West in 1204, a prostitute placed on the patriarchal throne and its government taken over by the Latins until 1261. The  Great Schism of the Western and Eastern Churches had taken place in 1054 and indeed, considering the sometimes friendly contacts later made between Crusaders and Muslims, and the  influence of Muslim thought, music and culture on the West from the time of the Crusades, it sometimes seems as though the Catholic West regarded the Orthodox Byzantines with more suspicion and hostility than the Muslims.

The Spiritual Adversaries at the End of the Millennium
If one lets one’s inner eye dwell upon the particular form of religion which has since developed in the West, namely the bookbound literalist faith of the simple bare Baptist chapel, one feels something that is oriented to this world and which seeks solidarity with the plain and simple, the humble and the homespun; one feels the attempt to identify with Jesus the  Man, the carpenter. This plain and simple earthiness obviously can be found in all cultures; there is a universal element to it., but not all cultures wish to base their religious life upon it. If one’s inner eye is allowed to dwell by contrast on the ceremonies of the Russian or Serbian Orthodox church, one can feel something Asiatic in mood, otherworldly, uplifted in spirit, surrounded by heavenly images and icons. At the same time one is made to feel that Christ is here now with this people, identified with them, their destiny, their suffering as a community and and their land. This is a more particularist element.

Both these two elements of East and West have their doubles (doppelgänger) which come into conflict. One can experience these doubles of East and West in oneself and see them in others in the way that one can feel drawn out of oneself into a world of self-obsessed illusions and delusions of grandeur; and also in the way that one can be dragged down into a world of  trivialising dross where one loses sight of what it means to be a human being. Rudolf Steiner identified spiritual beings with these forces of  seduction within the soul and he named them Lucifer (illusions of spirit) and Ahriman (illusions of matter). At the turn of each millennium, he said, these two forces, normally at odds with each other, come together in a strange collaboration to undermine and subvert human progress.(2)  Can such a collaboration be seen in the millenial events now unfolding in the tragedy of Kosovo and how does this relate to the New World Order?

Behind the New World Order impulse stemming from Cecil Rhodes and Lord Milner is the spirit of Ahriman – anti-Christian, materialistic, secularising, “humanist”, universal and globalising, wishing to embrace all in its technical Web of power and machinery. Representing the armed forces of 19 nations, nearly 800 planes have flown 5,500 sorties against Yugoslavia since NATO declared its “war” on 23rd March. US satellites watch from space, AWACS command and control planes direct operations from the air, billions of dollars have already been spent in just 46 days, the cold language of abstraction is used by NATO spokesmen to describe the killing of civilians. Major corporations rub their hands at the prospect of the profits to be made from the ‘generous reconstruction’ of  postwar Yugoslavia, not to mention the replenishment of the arsenals of the West with the latest Y2K-compatible technology. Western diplomats discuss how the Balkans can be pacified by subsumation into the “Euro-Atlantic structures” after the war. All is justified with lies and deceits in the name of the “humanitarian” and universal values of “the 21st century” to which all must subscribe.

Behind the  fierce rhetoric of the Serbs,  on the other hand, the talk of glory and honour and dignity of the Serb nation, ever harking back to the  glorious triumphs and equally glorious defeats of Serbia, champion of European civilisation and Christendom against the Turkish and Muslim barbarians and infidels – behind all these exalted words which can serve to blind paramilitaries to the cruelties they commit upon  the human beings who stand at their mercy, is Lucifer, spirit of the non-Christian sacro egoismo.  “Only I, only my community is of worth. Those who disagree with me and darken my light with their shadow will be eliminated. Away with them! I do not want them near me.”

As the second millennium becomes the third, Lucifer and Ahriman  have again conspired together, to create this crisis and to commit violence against humanity and against Christ who lives in us all. With Europe at peace, and without the cover of NATO’s bombing, the Serbs would not have dared to force out into neighbouring countries the numbers of refugees that they have. The Security Council, even Russia and China, would have condemned them as criminals and infringers of their neighbours’ national sovereignty. It was NATO’s peremptory action which made possible the scale of the humanitarian catastrophe it said it wished to prevent. Although NATO has said it foresaw the expulsions, even expected them, it did nothing to prepare for coping with the waves of refugees. It was more interested in using the refugees’ plight as propaganda to gain the support of its own citizens for an “inevitable” ground offensive. 66 years after Hitler came to power, his spectre has been made much of by the  propaganda ministries and channels of the West. Critics have pointed out that the West cared not a jot for the countless other refugees and victims of atrocity from Indonesia to Chechnya, Turkey and Algeria, while NATO supporters claim that, though it is regrettable that NATO did not stand up then, at least it has done so now, a bit like 1939 – more allusions to Hitler.

World Empire: A Hundred Years in The Making
But this war is not about saving refugees, despite the noble ghosts of Galahad and Biggles that may echo through the indignantly militant speeches of a Prime Minister who has never had to cower in an air raid shelter. The refugees seem but a means to an end. Before Christ, it was the spiritual egotism and pride inspired by  Lucifer that was the main threat to humanity. Since Christ, Lucifer has had to give way to Ahriman, whose materialistic lies, deceptions, and ensnarements have become and will for a long time yet, remain the prime danger. Hence the strategem of the New World Order that has been unfolding  over the last 100 years since America embarked on the road to its “Manifest Destiny” of world power with the seizure of the Philippines from Spain in 1898. It was cheered on by Rudyard Kipling, who sent his infamous poem  to Theodore Roosevelt urging him to take up ‘The White Man’s Burden’; Roosevelt used it to good effect to garner support for American imperialism. The strategem has been unfolding since the Boer War of 1899-1902, launched by Lord Milner (then in control of the Cape Colony) who literally pushed both the British and the Boers into it in order to ensure British control of South Africa’s gold and diamonds which could be used to further the Rhodes-Milner Round Table project for Anglo-American world imperium. It is noteworthy that South Africa and Yugoslavia, both multi-ethnic communities – which incidentally lie due north and south of each other – have dominated the world’s news in the 1990s. Rhodes said of Milner:

I support Milner absolutely without reserve. If he says peace, I say peace; if he says war, I say war. Whatever happens, I say ditto to Milner. (3)

Milner’s influence was far-reaching. Among his early American converts were Thomas Lamont of merchant bankers J.P.Morgan and  the  young, and later immensely influential, journalist Walter Lippmann, who wrote in his journal “New Republic” on February 17, 1917 for the first time about a future “Atlantic Community” :

On the shores of the Atlantic Ocean there has grown up a profound web of interests which joins together the Western World. Britain, France, Italy, even Spain, Belgium, Holland, the Scandinavian nations, and Pan-America are in the main one community in their deepest needs and their deepest purposes. They have a common interest in the ocean which unites them. They are today more inextricably bound together than most even as yet realize. …. we must fight Germany not to destroy her but to force her and to lure her back to the civilization in which she belongs. She is a rebel nation as long as she wages offensive war against the Western world.   

The Atlantic community was realised 50 years ago in 1949; it is called NATO. Lippmann’s words could have been written by Tony Blair’s speechwriter about Serbia.

Those on the left who wonder what material gain is to be had from the war in Kosovo (“the Gulf War was all about oil, wasn’t it?” they say) or others who say this present war is just a series of western blunders and cockups are invariably blind to this long running Anglo-American agenda; they are simply unaware of it, because, in typically Ahrimanic fashion, it manages to hide and disguise itself. It is there to be found, but people simply do not notice. Milner’s friend and member of his Group, British politician Leo Amery,  wrote in 1952:

 If the vision was Rhodes’, it was Milner who over some twenty years laid securely the foundations of a system whose power in shaping the outlook and spiritual kinship of an ever growing body of men throughout the English-speaking world it would be difficult to exaggerate. (4)

Kosovo and the British
A feature of the Kosovo crisis so far has been the hawkish reaction of the British who have adopted a high moral tone. Historically, the British have not tended to pay as much attention as other nations to what lives within their own folk soul and therefore are often unaware of what moves at a deeper level within their own motivations even though their quirky humour enables them to laugh at themselves. A few observations here: For over 200 years Britain has had the experience of its young men being sent across the oceans and continents to beat up people in distant lands at the command of the British elite who claim to determine Britain’s “self-interest”. It is a habit with the British; they fall into it readily. As the world’s first modern industrial nation which was largely responsible for building the world’s economy, it was natural that the British should introduce the world’s first professional police force in 1829. Until recently, the British have tended to like their police force, to regard it as fair and relatively incorruptible. They respond to calls for ‘law and order’ and the British media have a particular horror of ‘chaos and anarchy’. It is natural then for the British to see themselves as the world’s police force, sorting out the bully Milosevic in the European playground. But the instinct goes deeper. The flag of England is the Cross of St George – he who conquered the dragon. It is a red cross on a white field, which just happens to be the design worn by the Crusading Knights Templar. At the time of the Templars’ greatest fame in the 13th century the tales of King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table were already  popular among the nobility. “Arthur”, according to Rudolf Steiner, was a title borne by several generations of leaders who battled against “the wild astral (=untamed emotional) forces” rampaging around the Continent at the time, and certainly the relatively civilised Romano-Britons could be forgiven for regarding the invading Saxons as ‘wild astral forces’. (5) These Arthurian instincts are fairly noble, but they can be misused, even perverted.

In the 19th century John Ruskin was a kind of Arthurian knight battling against the rampant egotistic forces of Manchester capitalists who he saw as conducting a  campaign to spread ugliness and uniformity and destroy what spiritual nobility, arts, crafts, and gentility were left in Britain. He was a great supporter of  Gothic architecture, of the mediaeval  craft ethos and Pre-Raphaelite painting with its nostalgia for the Middle Ages. An enormously influential lecturer, writer, and critic, in 1870 he gave lectures at Oxford University where he sought to temper the colonialism of the age  with a spiritual idealism. These lectures fired the enthusiasm of a generation of  young Oxford men that included Arnold Toynbee (uncle of the famous historian of the same name), Alfred Milner and Cecil Rhodes and inspired them with dreams of a new kind of British imperialism. In Anglesey, the old Druidic centre, in September 1909, with Rhodes’ money, Milner was to found a circle which he called The Round Table and which was aimed at renewing “the Arthurian Idea” in a Transatlantic setting. It would spread British civilisation throughout the world and construct the “City of God” – a world state on the Anglo-American model.(6)  The British would supply the  inspiration, and the Americans the power. The special relationship between them would be “like Merlin and Arthur”, or like the Greek teachers who educated the more vigorous but aggressive Romans. This is how Harold Macmillan, for instance, saw the future of Britain after the end of  the British Empire. (7)  One remembers Margaret Thatcher “stiffening the sinews” of George Bush in 1990, or Tony Blair (20-odd planes over Yugoslavia) seeming to do the same thing to Bill Clinton (600-odd planes)  today. One can see the same sycophantic urgings to world power in the British media, especially in the Murdoch Press and in The Economist.  A perverted form of mediaeval chivalry and of a noble spiritual idealism can thus worm its way into the attitudes and thoughts of modern politicians and citizens. A once legitimate spiritual impulse dies and becomes a cadaver which is then animated by a modern and antithetical spiritual impulse.

Milner said of his view of life:

I am a Nationalist and not a Cosmopolitan. … the competition between nations, each seeking its maximum development, is the Divine order of the world, the law of Life and Progress. … My patriotism knows no geographical, but only racial limits. I am an Imperialist and not a Little Englander because I am a British race patriot. … It is not the soil of England … which is essential to arouse my patriotism, but the speech, the traditions, the spiritual heritage, the principles, the aspirations, of the British race. (my emphasis) … The British State must follow the race, must comprehend it, whenever it settles in appreciable numbers as an independent community. … We cannot afford to part with so much of our best blood.(8)   

These are not  the outdated views of  a 19th century imperialist of the old school. If one reads The Times, The Economist, Foreign Affairs or other leading American media organs today, one will become aware of essentially this same world view that regards the values of the English-speaking elite as the values which the rest of the world ought to hold and in fact will be made to hold. Nationality and race are no longer so important to this elite; as long as the values, “the traditions, the spiritual heritage, the principles, the aspirations” of the English-speaking people prevail.

In addition to this deep-rooted spiritual idealism from the Midle Ages and earlier that may be  subtly influencing Britons’ motivations and reactions to the Kosovo crisis, there are also factors of a more temperamental nature at work. Many Britons, watching from the safety of their living room armchairs the scenes of the refugees’ misery and hardship, feel their indignation rising. “It is not right”, they feel, “that people should be thrown out of their homes at 5 minutes’ notice.” Of course it is not, but those Britons forget that, while this may not have been happening on a big scale in Britain since the Norman invasion of 1066, people on the Continent and especially in the Balkans have been a lot more used to upping stakes and moving rapidly out of the way of angry soldiers during the last 100 years. The very phlegma and solidity of the British temperament is outraged by such  violations of home and property. Although the British are said to be a people with a pronounced affinity for history and tradition, what they are responding to primarily in Kosovo are the emotional heart-tugging scenes in front of their eyes. Who could fail to feel for the suffering of the Kosovars and indignation at their treatment by a Serbian government that even denies the fact of what the whole world can see? But if  Britons think of the history of Kosovo at all, they might recall what they have seen on their TV screens from Yugoslavia over the past ten years. But do they know anything of what was happening in Kosovo during the 1980s? Are they aware of the movement for a Greater Albania promoted in Kosovo almost immediately after Tito’s death in 1980? NewYork Times reporter Marvin Howe wrote in 1982:

The [Albanian] nationalists have a two-point platform,” according to Becir Hoti, an executive secretary of the Communist Party of Kosovo, “first to establish what they call an ethnically clean Albanian republic and then the merger with Albania to form a greater Albania. ” Mr. Hoti, an Albanian, expressed concern over political pressures that were forcing Serbs to leave Kosovo. “What is important now,” he said, “is to establish a climate of security and create confidence.” The migration of Serbs is no ordinary problem becuase Kosovo is the heartland of Serbian history, culture and religion. Serbs have been in this region since the seventh century, long before they founded their own independent dynasty here in 1168. Some 57,000 Serbs have left Kosovo in the last decade, and the number increased considerably after the riots of March and April last year…” The 1981 census showed Kosovo with a population of 1,584,558, of whom 77.5 percent were ethnic Albanians, 13.2 percent Serbs and 1.7 percent Montenegrins. The population in 1971 of 1,243,693 was 73.8 percent Albanian, 18.4 percent Serbian and 2.5 percent Montenegrin…. “We don’t want to go because we have a large farm,” a Serbian farmer’s wife said in a village near Pristina. “Our property hasn’t been touched, but there are the insults and the intimidation, so we feel uncomfortable.” (9)

Five years later, another New York Times reporter observed a far worse situation:

Ethnic Albanians in the Government have manipulated public funds and regulations to take over land belonging to Serbs. And politicians have exchanged vicious insults.  Slavic Orthodox churches have been attacked, and flags have been torn down.  Wells have been poisoned and crops burned. Slavic boys have been knifed,  and some young ethnic Albanians have been told by their elders to rape Serbian girls… The goal of the radical nationalists among them, one said in an interview, is an “ethnic Albania that includes western Macedonia, southern Montenegro, part of southern Serbia,   Kosovo and Albania itself.” ….As Slavs flee the protracted violence,  Kosovo is becoming what ethnic Albanian nationalists have been demanding for years, and especially strongly since the bloody rioting by ethnic Albanians in Pristina  in 1981 – an ”ethnically pure” Albanian region, ”Republic of Kosovo’ ‘ in all but name. Last summer, the authorities in Kosovo said they  documented 40 ethnic Albanian attacks on Slavs in two months. In the last two years, 320 ethnic Albanians have been sentenced for political crimes, nearly half of  them characterized as severe. In one incident, Fadil Hoxha, once the leading politician of ethnic Albanian origin in Yugoslavia, joked at an official dinner in Prizren last year that Serbian women should be used to satisfy potential ethnic Albanian rapists. After his quip was reported this October, Serbian women in Kosovo protested,  and Mr. Hoxha was dismissed from the Communist Party. Officials in Belgrade view the ethnic Albanian challenge as imperiling the foundations of the  multinational experiment called federal Yugoslavia, which consists of six republics and two provinces…… High-ranking officials have spoken of the ”Lebanonizing” of their country and have compared its troubles to the strife in Northern Ireland. Borislav Jovic, a member of the Serbian party’s presidency, spoke in an interview of the prospect of “two Albanias, one north and one south, like divided Germany or Korea,” and of ”practically the breakup of Yugoslavia.” Ethnic Albanians already control almost every phase of life in the autonomous province of Kosovo,  including the police, judiciary, civil service, schools and factories. Non-Albanian visitors almost immediately feel the independence – and suspicion – of the ethnic Albanian authorities……While 200,000 Serbs and Montenegrins still live  in the province, they are scattered and lack cohesion. In the last seven years, 20,000 of them have fled the province, often leaving behind farmsteads and houses,  for the safety of the Slavic north. (10)

Kosovo is where the tragic breakup of Yugoslavia began, and Kosovo is where it will end. Certainly, two wrongs do not make a right, and just because the Albanians treated Kosovo Serbs badly in the 1980s does not mean the Serbs should try to expel all or most Albanians in the 1990s. Nevertheless, people in the West should be aware of this background before demonising the Serbs. There is also plenty of evidence from Yugoslavia and from all over Europe and America testifying to the involvement of the Kosovo Liberation Army in terrorist activity and widespread international drug dealing. This is the group whose airforce NATO has effectively become. The background to the situation in Kosovo then,  is highly complex and Britons should beware behaving like knights on white chargers, believing themselves to be defending the honour of  a peaceful people who have suddenly been set upon by the wicked bully who has been terrorising the neighbourhood for the last 10 years. This is not 1938/9. A sincere effort at a peaceful solution was not made at Rambouillet by NATO, which sought to force the Serbs into war by imposing an ultimatum the Serbs could not possibly accept if they were to remain a sovereign nation. The Austrians did the same thing in July 1914 when they presented their ultimatum to the Serbs, who accepted all of it except the clauses that demanded Austrian participation in the hunt for Bosnian terrorists. These were rejected on the grounds of national sovereignty, just as the Serbs claimed the same grounds for rejecting NATO’s demands for free access to Yugoslav land and airspace and effective independence for Kosovo within three years. As did Austria, NATO haughtily dismissed the Yugoslav argument and proceeded to war because they wanted to have a war. This, when the British call for endless patience and negotiation in Northern Ireland and President Clinton urges American parents to teach their teenagers to solve problems with “words not violence”.

Kosovo, China, and the 21st Century
On the 8th May (11), the 46th day of the conflict, NATO in its latest blunder, widely condemned as a “barbaric war crime” by China and Russia, bombed the Chinese embassy in Belgrade. The ironies of history are indeed remarkable. 99 years ago saw the first attempt at a genuinely international world police action when 8 western nations sent their forces into China and relieved the two-month siege of the foreign legations in Beijing by the  fanatical Chinese nationalists known as the Boxers. Imperial rivalries among the westerners soon put paid to further cooperation, but today one western Power is the indisputable police commander and all others obey its will. In the International Herald Tribune (17th March 1999) Brian Beedham, Associate Editor of The Economist, that journal with its finger on the pulse of New World Order thinking, wrote that “the post-Cold War agenda of  the new NATO” should be about: “how to stop another Saddam Hussein from making another grab at the oil of the Gulf, how to control the passions of Islamic revivalists in Algeria and  Egypt and Iran and Saudi Arabia, how to bring a steadying hand to the turmoil in Central Asia, how to prevent a bloody disintegration of much of  Africa.” Beedham went on to call for a “standing alliance of the western democracies” to police much of Asia and Africa. He first did this at the time of the Gulf Crisis in September 1990 (New World Order episode 1). Nine years later, with episode 2, the scheme is bearing fruit. America cannot be seen to do this by itself; it “needs” the figleaf of 18 other countries. Kosovo is providing a testcase of how these other countries can be mobilised for future global policing operations. Last year 1998 saw a major assault on large sections of humanity in the economic realm; by September the world economy was, it was said, on the verge of collapse. The Russian economy has indeed collapsed – there is widespread reversion to barter in Russia or the replacement of the rouble by the dollar. The economic dimension of the European Union Project reached a certain culmination with the launch of the Euro on 31st December. 1999 has since its beginning been a year, not of economics, but of politics and rights: the arrest of the Kurdish leader Ocalan, a major setback for those Kurds who supported him. Then swiftly came the ousting of Oskar Lafontaine in Germany, the EU corruption crisis, the unprecedented mass resignation of the Commission and the subsequent selection of a new strongman in Romano Prodi, and then the Kosovo Crisis and the War, which looks like continuing into the summer and could well turn into a maelstrom.(12)  This could result in developing for the next few years the political dimension of the EU Project – the de facto creation of an EU foreign policy and defence force, which could stand alongside the USA as Beedham and friends envisage. It could well be that next year 2000 could see a third assault on humanity in the cultural or spiritual realm.

At a conference of the New Atlantic Initiative (13)  in Istanbul (2nd May 1998) Beedham gave a speech on “The Atlantic Community in 2012″. He outlined three scenarios the Atlantic community might have to cope with in the next century: a confrontation with China; a general world ‘chaos and anarchy’; a struggle for the resources of Central Asia, which he called The Great Game, Round Two. This last he believed most likely. The following remarks from his talk are worth pondering:

1) The new alliance’s work will for the most part be done outside Europe. 2) The United States will be entitled to ask for European help in operations outside Europe, in return for its continuing support of Europe’s own security. 3) The oil and gas [of the new Central Asian republics, Kazakhstan et al] are of obvious interest to Europe and America. 4) This many-sided tug-of-war over central Asia will be a long, complicated business.And remember that central Asia sits next door to the familiar instabilities of the Gulf. Remember, too, that the people living in these two regions­the stretch of land that reaches from the Red Sea to the Chinese border­are almost all Muslims.

In other words, Muslim support is going to be needed – and what do we see in Kosovo? The NATO Crusaders riding to the rescue of  oppressed Muslims in the Serbs’ “Holy Land”. Beedham goes on:

we should recognise the new importance of Turkey. The Turks stand today where the Germans stood during the cold war. Turkey is now the big front-line country, looking out into the  territory from which trouble may be coming.   

Now perhaps we understand why not much help is forthcoming from the NATO Crusaders for the Kurds who have been fighting the Turkish government since the mid-80s. Maybe the Crusaders remember that Saladin was a Kurd. Beedham closes with this observation:

The Atlantic democracies will face, in rising order of probability, a challenge to their present degree of military superiority; the growth of a powerful China whose foreign policy will reach much farther into the world than that of today’s China; and, partly because of that, a prolonged and dangerous multi-power contest for influence over a large segment of Asia.

This is the scenario that the elites of the West are anticipating in the next century and for which Kosovo is being used as a testbed. And if they think this scenario hard enough, it will surely come to pass. Is this neo-Darwinist struggle, from Rhodes through Milner to Beedham and Kissinger all that can be envisaged for the new millennium? As long as no fruitful and spiritually based new social impulses permeate society, this will indeed become the future. If the idea of the threefolding of society which Anthroposophy has kept largely to itself these last 70 years does not make a breakthrough, within 20-30 years we are likely to see war with China and/or the Muslim world and the consequent destruction of Russia which lies between Asia and the NATO bloc.

NOTES

(1) New View 2nd Quarter 1999
(2)  R. Steiner, lecture of 7.3.1914
(3)  W.T. Stead: The Last Will and Testament of Cecil John Rhodes, p. 108
(4)  Preface to Vladimir Halperin: Lord Milner and the Empire. The Evolution of
       British Imperialism. London 1952, p. 16.
(5)  R.Steiner, lecture of 27th August 1924, Karma Relationships Vol. VIII
(6)  Caroll Quigley: The Anglo-American Establishment; John Kendle: The Round Table Movement and Imperial Union. Toronto 1975.
(7)  See, for instance, Christopher Hitchens, “Blood, Class, and Nostalgia – Anglo-American Ironies” pp 22-24
(8)  John Marlowe: Milner – Apostle of Empire. A Life of Alfred George the Right Honourable Viscount Milner of St. James and Cape Town, KG, GCB, GCMG (1854-1925). London 1976, p. 364sq.
(9)  New York Times 12 July 1982
(10)  The New York Times 1 November 1987 David Binder
(11)  On 8th May 1945 the German armed forces surrendered to the Allies and the war in Europe ended.
(12)  Ahead of us is the total eclipse of the Sun on 11th August and also Nostradamus’ only really clear quatrain, (72, Century 10) which speaks of  “the great King of Terror” who “will come from the sky” and of “Mars reigning happily” before “the year 1999 and seven months” .
(13)  A thinktank and pressure group founded at “the Congress of  Prague” 10-12 May 1996 and headquartered at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington DC. Its patrons include:  Václav Havel,  Margaret Thatcher, Helmut Schmidt, and  Henry Kissinger, who is also chairman of its international advisory board, which includes Brian Beedham,  Zbigniew Brzezinski, Newt Gingrich, Samuel P. Huntington and Josef Joffe.

    This page was created  Dec 1999  Last updated 21.7.2012