Bailey Critics -- Part 5

2001-8-25 04:09:00

New World Order

Distortion Number Six:

"Alice A. Bailey originated the phrase "New World Order." This New World Order is an evil scheme to enslave the human spirit, to unify the world governments and religion by force under a beastly totalitarian system where individual political and religious freedom will be no more."

JJ:

Actually, this first statement is roughly correct. Whereas, I am sure that Alice A. Bailey was not the very first to use this term, it is true that she did write about it and popularize it.

In fact, when she talked about the term she often mentioned that totalitarian states often used a similar term and that such ideologies which restrict freedom and the human spirit are not to be confused with the coming changes which would indeed create a "New World."

In order to understand what she meant by a New World Order it would be helpful to examine what she thought was the "Old World Order" which it would replace. To fully understand this we must realize that she introduced the term in early 1940 shortly after Europe entered World War II.

The Old World Order that she wanted to see replaced with new and better governments were the ideologies of the Nazis and Japanese that lead these and many nations in the past to seek world dominion by conquest and force.

The New World Order that she talked about was not something future to us at this time (2001 AD), but was a new world that would be created after the defeat of the Axis powers. The New World Order would replace the totalitarian governments of Germany, Japan and Italy with free governments which would join forces with other free nations in order to hold in check the forces of totalitarianism.

This New World Order which was talked about by Bailey is here today. It is not perfect and she states that we will yet evolve to new and better orders, but if you compare the world today to the beginning of World War II in 1940 no one can argue that we do indeed have a new and better world, however flawed. If you were to take an English infantryman from 1940 and transport him to the current year of 2001 he would jump for joy that Hitler was defeated and that the world is in as good a shape as it is. As he would look upon our communications systems, satellites, television, space travel, the Internet, relative peace etc, he would indeed agree that this world in our present is a new World Order -- compared to 1940.

Bailey stated:

"It is necessary, therefore, to speak with directness, to indicate the inherent dangers of the present situation (1940), to present its amazing opportunity to bring about needed changes, and to point out the lines of demarcation between the right and the wrong ways of living, between a vision of the new world order and the retrograde plans of the so-called "new order" with which the totalitarian powers seek to bewilder humanity."

Also:

"On all sides the need for a new world order is being recognized. The totalitarian powers are talking of the "new order in Europe"; the idealists and thinkers are unfolding schemes and plans which vision entirely new conditions that will bring the old bad order to an end. There is a constant demand for the Allies to state their peace aims and indicate clearly what adjustments will be made after the war, because a vision of the future world policy will help humanity through the present crisis."

Here she makes it clear that the New World Order will materialize after the war.

She makes five statements in "Externalization of the Hierarchy" concerning the New World Order which are never quoted by her enemies:

(Capitalization added to the original text for emphasis.)

"In the new world order, the governing body in any nation should be composed of those who work for the greatest good of the greatest number and who at the same time offer opportunity to all, seeing to it that THE INDIVIDUAL IS LEFT FREE. Today the men of vision are achieving recognition, thus making possible a right choice of leaders. It was not possible until this century."
"The new world order will be founded on an ACTIVE SENSE OF RESPONSIBILITY. The rule will be 'all for one and one for all.' This attitude among nations will have to be developed. It is not yet present."
"The new world order will NOT IMPOSE a uniform type of government, a synthetic religion and a system of standardisation upon the nations. The SOVEREIGN RIGHTS OF EACH NATION WILL BE RECOGNISED AND ITS PECULIAR GENIUS, INDIVIDUAL TRENDS AND RACIAL QUALITIES WILL BE PERMITTED FULL EXPRESSION. In one particular only should there be an attempt to produce unity, and that will be in the field of education."
"The objective of their work can be summed up thus: the new world order will facilitate the establishing of right human relations, based on justice, on the recognition of inherited rights, on opportunity for all-irrespective of race, colour or creed-on the suppression of crime and selfishness through right education, and on the recognition of divine potentialities in man as well as the recognition of a divine directing Intelligence in Whom man lives, and moves and has his being."
"The new world order will be confronted with many problems. These problems will not be solved by the imposition of a solution by means of force, as in the Axis world order. They will be solved by right educational processes and by understanding the objectives of the true world order.... The democracies, with all their present ineffectiveness, have in them the germ of that which is truly new, for they are the expression of an upward surging towards self-rule and self-mastery by humanity as a whole."

The end goal? Bailey says:

"Humanity will then emerge into the light of freedom with a revealed beauty and a spiritual purpose, hitherto unknown."

It is true that if some fringe and extreme movements had their way in implementing their version of a New World Order that we would merely have a return to the "Old Bad Order." But Djwahl Khul's New World Order as revealed through Bailey should not be associated at random with delusionary visions of quirky prophets.

If we let Bailey's words stand by themselves without distortion, the light and a direction toward maximum freedom becomes obvious.

Go to:

Next Article in "Bailey Critics" Series

Previous Article in "Bailey Critics" Series

Index of Articles On "Bailey Critics"