• Wed. Apr 17th, 2024

Barbados Uncensored

Beyond the News, Inside the Issues

Unravelling the Globalist Intentions of the Mottley Government Part 1

Feb 20, 2022

Last Updated on December 15, 2022 4:36 pm by Editor

“We believe the time has come for the country to confront the latent unease about the future relationship between church and state”. So stated the editor of Barbados Today in its Saturday 19 February piece entitled, “Ignoring religious concerns not advised”.

Good Morning Mr/Ms. Editor. How do you want your coffee? Black? One sugar? Two sugars?

Some of us, too few I might add, have been awake and smelling the coffee for quite some time; at least since the 2018 election. Many have forgotten that in the same election Ms. Mottley signalled her intention to lead Barbados into becoming a multi-religious society. 

Lest we forget, let me digress and remind Barbadians that the PM also promised a referendum on the proposal of legalizing same sex marriages.

Strict guardians of our heritage should now be carefully watching and standing ready with their torches to hold her feet to the fire on this matter. Any other body part that might easily conduct the message will do just fine. 

Quest Superfluous

It should be clear to anyone who frequents the terrain outside of the “thinking” bubble in which most Barbadians live, that Ms. Mottley’s quest is superfluous; Barbados is already a multi-religious society!  The evidence supports it.

First of all, long before the the Big Works Era, Barbados had moved to the notion of “faith-based communities” in recognition that there exists a range of religious / spiritual pursuits in this country. 

Second, successive Barbados censuses report a variety of religions in Barbados accounting for much of the demographic diversity in the country.

Now while the task of defining a religion may pose some conceptual challenges, it is much easier to disambiguate any confusion between a religion and a denomination

Christianity is a religion but under it is subsumed several different denominations such as Catholic, Anglican, Pentecostal, Seventh Day  Adventists. Their point of commonality is their manifest allegiance to the supreme being as revealed in the Judeo-Christian Bible.

On the other hand, Islam is a different religion because it claims to recognize a different supreme being.  That supreme being is called Allah

The same principle applies to Hinduism which recognizes not a supreme being per se but a collection of gods.  Nothing new there; the Roman Empire had its pantheon which was “a circular temple in Rome, completed around AD 125 and dedicated to all the gods”.

So, Barbados has it all: a variety of religions and a variety of Christian denominations.  Let us not forget to mention “Obeah” and the variety of swamis and spiritual mediums who freely peddle their services in the advertising columns of the established media.

Secular Society

Barbados is also a secular society and has been since the de-establishment of the Anglican Church back in 1969 as we explained in a previous article where we challenged the views of Peter Wickham and the humanists on that subject.

As we explained in that article, Mr. Wickham’s notion that a secular society means “a society without religion” is flawed because it is inconsistent with how the term is defined and understood. You can read the article here.

Globalist Agenda

What everyone should really find “puzzling” is why the Honourable PM even wants to lead the country in religious matters. Perhaps “interfere” is a more appropriate term.

There are more than enough economic, political, constitutional, legal, ecological and other matters for the PM and her full house to address than expend time on leadership in religious matters which is rightly the domain of religious leaders and faith-based groups.

If what we are saying above constitutes a reasonable premise, then all but the totally comatose will fail to grasp the fact that Ms. Mottley has an ulterior motive and an alternative agenda.  

But we do not have to search far or dig deep to find those ulterior motives and alternative agenda. The answer revolves around the term “globalist”.  Simply put, “Mia Mottley is a globalist”.  

I do not know whether I can say the same thing about all the members of her cabinet. One gets the impression that some are just willing pawns in her agenda and are concerned just about riding on her coattails to retain a seat in parliament. Others are just as blind, perhaps, as some in the general population.

Nascent and Elite Globalists

Since the term “globalist” means different things to different people and nothing much to some,  perhaps we should explain.  Put simply, a globalist is one who sees the world as one big village or society and all that that implies. Let’s call this your basic or nascent globalist.

The elite globalists, on the other hand, believe in one-world government as the solution to our problems.  Others have come to share this view simply because of the size and nature of their business activities.  We are thinking here of the leaders of Big Tech, Big Business and Big Media. 

So the globalists are not some secret cabal, as denouncers of conspiracy theorists would have us believe. There are actually leaders with a clear philosophy to whom we can point.  Perhaps the most vocal in recent times has been Bill Gates and Klaus Schwab of the WEF. 

Klaus Schwab

One-world government means that even where individual countries may have a ruler, be it Prime Minister, King or President, effective control of the country is from one external supranational (not to be confused with “supernatural”) control centre. Think of it as a “one-controlling-all” situation.

Aspects of one-world government have been in play for quite some time in some areas of international society by necessity; for example,  telecommunications controlled by the ITU (International Telecommunication Union) mail by the UPU (Universal Postal Union) and air travel by IATA (International Air Transport Authority).   

The idea of “the one controlling-all” has been around for longer than anyone can remember. Multinational companies are controlled by a single headquarters and a federal government is one where there is a central government and several other “satellite” governments, for example, state or provincial governments. The USA, Germany and Canada have federal governments. Large countries tend to have federal governments but that may be an over-simplification.

The one-controlling-many or one-controlling-all is well known in the management literature as “centralization”. In fact, the management literature abounds with the benefits to be had from centralization. Naturally, centralization has its disadvantages which is why decentralization, the converse of centralization, has its merits and advocates.

So, on the surface there is nothing inherently wrong or sinister about one world government as a governance approach.

Globalist Agenda

But here is the problem; if you work for a large, centralized corporation it does not usually tell you what religion to adopt. Up to this point, if you live in a country with a federal government it does not tell you how in or in what from you can hold your money and financial assets. You choose based on a number of factors including the options available.

Until the covid-19 pandemic no one could tell you when to come and where you could go. Think of a one-world-government then as covid-19 pandemic protocols, restrictions and vaccine mandates on super-steroids, no pun intended.

And we do not mean with just more public health restrictions or controls. We mean with restrictions or controls on most key aspects of life including work, travel, religion, banking and finance, education etc.

If you are guessing that a one-world-government may mean the end of freedom as we know it, then you are just beginning to understand what one-world-government might entail.  

In effect, one-world-government may mean the end or severe curtailment of three things that are fundamental to human society as we have known it: national sovereignty, diversity and individual freedom or individual sovereignty.

In a sense, these three – sovereignty, diversity and individual freedom – are merely different sides of the same coin.  In case you have forgotten, a coin has three sides: “heads”, “tails” and the edge! 

Think of the “heads” as national sovereignty and “tails” as individual sovereignty or freedom. Or vice versa; it matters not. Diversity is the edge of the coin because it connects and gives effect to the two broader sides of national sovereignty (heads) and individual freedom or sovereignty (“tails”).

Alternatively, think of national sovereignty as providing a structure or container, if you will, for individuals to express their diversity of culture, religion etc. as well as individual freedom of choice. 

The world is driving inescapably to a one-world-government where these three will be curtailed or reshaped. People cannot see the one-world-government taking shape because they cannot connect the dots or reason strategically.

No such blindness or lack of strategy exists in those pressing for one-world-government, that is, the elite globalists and their puppets. They are busy connecting the dots both in their speeches and strategically in terms of the legislation and policies they implement in individual countries and international institutions where they are leaders.

A key element of their rhetoric and strategy is creating talk, buzz or propaganda around those issues that connect people all across the world; issues such as climate change, technology, finance and now public health.

The issue of global public health should be fresh in our memories. Globalists are trying to extract all the capital (pun intended) they can from the covid-19 plandemic or scamdemic, take your pick.  We now know that the globalists actively envisioned and prepared for such a pandemic years in advance.  Even if they did not start the so-called pandemic, they are certainly capitalizing on it in different ways.

Click to see our dedicated Ukraine Video Update Page 

So it is interesting to see how they are using a global health issue to test out universal controls such as vaccine mandates, vaccine passports, mask wearing and lockdowns.

Incidentally, the lockdowns also provided a way to try to bankrupt countries so that they would have to borrow more money from the IMF and the global financial elite thus putting them be in a position to accept whatever terms or conditions are imposed. Those terms and conditions will include the move to a one-world digital currency. Two birds with one stone. Brilliant strategy!

But more on the finance aspect of the one-world-government in another instalment.

All of this is happening right before your eyes. But if you are restricting the focus of your eyes to what the mainstream international media is feeding you or worse, just listening to local news, then you will never see the big picture and connect the dots.

Having said all of the above, here is a recent BBC article that levels the charge of conspiracy theory at the notion of one-world government and attempts to debunk the stuff we have been saying. We include it for balance. You be the judge. 

In Part 2 we will focus on religion and why globalists want to control it. In subsequent instalments we will look at the financial imperative for one-world government and later, at some of the so-called elite globalists.


[fluentform id=”7″]



Dr. Aldon Tull, the author, is a retired educator who holds a Master of Science in International Marketing and the Doctor of Education. 

He can be reached at editor@barbadosuncensored.com at 246-228-3720 or on Whatsapp at 246-846-3191






By Editor

One thought on “Unravelling the Globalist Intentions of the Mottley Government Part 1”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *