A warped view of the "Anglo-American World Power"

by cedars 9 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • cedars

    A relative of mine recently asked me to comment on what was said in the final talk at the latest convention. I obviously didn't attend the convention, but I was able to get hold of a recording. Here is a transcript from a recording of the final talk, entitled God's Kingdom Will Crush All Other Kingdoms - When? The talk was given at a convention in the UK, but it was evidently based on a manuscript and therefore would have been given at conventions around the world...

    "The traditional ironlike rulership of the AAWP (Anglo-American World Power) has been forced to listen to common people! Common people want their say in the government that rules over them! Civil rights campaigns, labour union pressure, independence movements from the common people have all undermined the ability of the AAWP to act with the strength it once had. Sometimes with very close election results and opposing ideologies even popular leaders don't have a clear mandate to implement the policies they would like. Clay and iron do not stick together! There is no sticking together of the authoritarian rule that has been the symbol of the AAWP and the common people who have risen up in recent times."

    The talk goes on to discuss a changed understanding from that expressed in pages 57 to 60 of the book Pay Attention to Daniel's Prophecy (see the section "A Fragile Amalgam"). The society once held that the feet made of "iron mixed with clay" represented different kinds of rulership, namely "authoritarian or tyrannical" governments versus "claylike" democratic governments, denoting the politically fragmented world in the time of the end. They now believe that the feet represent the AAWP, as do the lower legs, in that "devisive elements" within the AAWP undermine it's ability to "act as it would like".

    On listening to the talk, what hit me was not so much the change in understanding. The society are constantly changing their minds on prophecy and quickly losing all credibility in their efforts to decipher scriptures. What hit me more was the worrying depiction of current world events as seen from the eyes of the governing body! According to the governing body, the following can be collectively said of Britain and the USA:
    1. Democracy is a relatively new concept, and only in "the time of the end" have these two countries been forced to listen to their people
    2. Civil rights campaigns, labour union pressure and independence movements are hindering these two countries from acting decisively
    3. A very close election result, or a "set of opposing ideologies" has led to "a popular leader (or leaders)" not being able to implement his (or their) policies with a "clear mandate", and this somehow relates to the prophecy of the immense image
    4. "Authoritarian rule" is a symbol of Britain and the USA
    5. The common people (in Britain and the USA) have "risen up in recent times"

    I could go into each of those points in detail and demonstrate how ludicrous, inaccurate and sensationalist each of them are, but I don't think I need to. What disturbs me is that the lives of 7 and a half million people around the globe are being controlled by a group of men who's view of the world around them is completely warped and paranoid. How can they interpret bible prophecy and decide on sensitive doctrinal issues if they can't even get a handle on reality?

    I should also mention that it was made very clear in the talk that the points in the outline would feature in a future Watchtower, so even if this has yet to be published, it soon will be.

  • cedars
  • cantleave

    It's a flip flop, they used to say that in the 80's.

  • Band on the Run
    Band on the Run

    Some people did not pay attention in high school Civics. Ancient Greece had democracy. The problem was that military leaders kept seizing power and becoming dictators. See Julius Caesar. Centuries later the leaders of what we call The American Revolution were steeped in the classics. George Washington was not trusted. Indeed, funds were held back on purpose to stop the army from staging a coup. After the war was completed, a high level plot to commit a coup d'etat was accidentally discovered and Washington stopped it.

    All these writers attended different schools so I wonder where they acquire their world view of history and civics. I would start to look at power in Asia and other developing areas with great resources. The US S&P index rating signals an end to American imperialism. It is no longer immediately after WWII.

  • sd-7

    Well, the feet and toes represented a 'politically divided world' as of the Daniel book. Strictly speaking, this isn't really all that different, it's just applying that concept to the Anglo-American World Power. Can't believe I'm saying that. Anyway, it's splitting hairs. Big deal.

    And of course the Society would view governments listening to their people as a restraining force--they're used to doing whatever they want while eliminating any who speak against them. So from that point of view, the U.S. would be 'limited' in how it uses its power. It's actually as kooky as the Rutherford days, reading that excerpt from this talk now. (sigh)


  • cedars

    Thanks sd-7. You're right, it does have a ring of Rutherford to it. I found myself listening to his 1938 "Face the Facts" speech at the Albert Hall, and was astounded at the similar level of hogwash, and how saying absurdities with a booming voice somehow made these acceptable, believable, even applaudable. If you were to actually read the Face the Facts transcript, even in the same period, with a calm and relaxed voice to an impartial audience - it probably would have drawn laughter and derision, and rightly so.

  • the-illuminator81

    Democracy is a relatively new concept?

    They're both authoritarian and indecisive? That's impossible!

    They haven't the slightest clue..

  • Mad Sweeney
    Mad Sweeney

    SD-7 makes a good point. Only a group of authoritarians would view the people as a weakening factor in government.

    For research and my take on the "new light" portion of that same talk:


  • james_woods

    What I have always failed to understand is where this whole "Anglo-American World Power" concept came from anyway?

    True, the U.S. and Great Britain have usually been allies, including WW2, but this does not mean that they are a monolithic world power. Both have other allies, and the two of them have had differences over the years. Did the U.S. directly help the British in the Falkland Islands war?

    Does anybody in the media, or in current world politics, ever refer to "Anglo-American World Power"?

    I think it is just stilted JW-speak, and that the Rutherford-era JWs themselves thought it up because they wanted to bash the U.S. politically, but were afraid to come right out and say it plainly.

  • cedars

    james_woods - you make a good point. Just because two countries work together as allies doesn't make them an empire!

    sd-7 & mad sweeney - interesting how you highlight the subliminal disdain for the common people in the society's rhetoric.

    I really wish convention audiences would analyse what is said in more detail and compare what they hear with reality. It worries me that certain ones will be watching news coverage of the UK riots and saying "Ooooh, the society warned us of this at the convention!"

    Just because a few hoodies opportunistically run amok smashing shop windows, stealing TVs and burning homes and businesses, doesn't mean an "Empire" is being "hindered" from "acting decisively" with "traditional authoritarianism" by "devisive elements".

Share this