George Soros: NATO Should Be Used as a Tool to Usher in a New World Order
In 1993, George Soros penned an essay about using NATO and NGOs as tools to move the world towards a New World Order; a world of “open societies.”
One-time or recurring donations can be made through Ko-Fi:
In 1993, George Soros penned an essay about using NATO and NGOs as tools to move the world towards a New World Order; a world of “open societies.”
The world order that prevailed since the end of World War II has come to an end with the collapse of the Soviet empire, Soros wrote in an essay in 1993, and so a new conceptual framework is needed to understand the current situation, one that considers not only relationships between states but also relationships within states.
The conceptual framework Soros was referring to was the concept of open and closed societies. As we all know, Soros has been promoting open societies and launched the Open Society Foundations in 1993 to this end. Using the word “open” is misleading. Soros’ concept of open society is not what most people think it is and not what his Foundation portrays it to be.
An open society is a dynamic system that encourages moral universalism. It contrasts with a closed society which is characterised by strict laws, moral codes or religious doctrines. The “open society” concept was first coined by French-Jewish philosopher Henri Bergson in 1932 and further developed by Austrian-born Jewish philosopher Karl Popper during World War II. Popper saw the open society as part of a historical continuum that moves from tribalism towards a system where tradition is critically examined and faces the challenge of less personal group relations.
Related: The open society: What does it really mean? De Jure Law Journal, 2017
In 1993, Soros saw the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (“NATO”) as the only institution of collective security that had not failed. He declared that NATO needed to redefine its mission to address the new security threats, projecting its power and influence to promote open societies and combat the threats posed by closed societies (based on nationalist principles). A new kind of alliance is needed, Soros pontificated, and proposed a “Partnership for Peace,” which could be a separate organisation from NATO, with a structure and budget. Its main task would be to help with nations’ transformation process to open societies.
In a Twitter thread, Data Republican (small r) highlighted how George Soros’ 1993 essay was laying out the vision for NATO and a network of non-governmental organisations (“NGOs”) to push the world towards open societies.
George Soros, The Mastermind
By Data Republican, 2 May 2025
Today’s systems of NGOs isn’t accidental – it was laid out in a vision 30 years ago by none other than George Soros.
I joined Mike Benz on a livestream last night, where he was kind enough to walk us through the basics.
As my bio says, I am just a tool builder. I am not a historian or academic. The information in this thread is common knowledge for many. It wasn’t for me.
I want to walk you through an essay which Mike pointed me to – a chilling essay written in 1993 by George Soros, ‘Toward a New World Order: The Future of NATO’.
George Soros Toward a New World Order The Future of NATO Download
The essay lays out a new mission for NATO after the Cold War. NATO would no longer be a defensive alliance against Russia – that is obsolete. Instead, it would proactively go out and shape other countries into “open societies.”
“[NATO’s new] mission is best defined in terms of open and closed societies.”
Toward a New World Order: The Future of NATO, Open Society Foundations, George Soros, 1 November 1993
Soros redefined peace and security not as the absence of war, but in terms of how many countries are “open societies.”
“Peace and security … depend first and foremost on a successful transition to open society.”
Toward a New World Order: The Future of NATO, Open Society Foundations, George Soros, 1 November 1993
In other words, NATO’s new mission: if a country doesn’t adopt Western-style capitalism and liberalism, NATO should step in … politically, economically and eventually, militarily.
What is an “Open Society?”
The term was coined by philosopher Karl Popper and expanded in this 1993 essay. Soros, of course, would go on to build a coalition of NGOs and interfere in the US elections under his “Open Society Foundation” banner.
Here are the elements of an “open society” in theory:
Democracy
Free markets
Civil rights
Minority protections
Transparency
A “global” rules-based order
In practice, “open society” means something very different. Let’s go through the essay.
Open Society: A government which agrees with Soros and thus deserves to exist
Soros Quote: “Open society is based on the recognition … that participants act on the basis of imperfect understanding. Closed society on its denial.”
Translation: You’re an open society if you accept our interpretation of pluralism and Western values. Otherwise, we’ll label you “closed,” even if your people elect their leaders or protect cultural traditions. And this gives us pretext to justify military actions against you.
Foreign aid is a pillar of open societies
Soros quote: “The primary need is for constructive engagement in the transition to democratic, market-oriented, open societies.”
Translation: We pour aid into countries that remake themselves in Soros’ image. And no amount of money is too much to accomplish that – because, again, we have redefined “peace” to mean “as many countries follow the Open Society model as possible.” And if aid fails, then military intervention is next.
Take a moment to think about this. What do you think this means for anyone who is opposed to foreign aid? They are agents of “closed societies.” They are a threat to national security. Ergo … They are a threat to democracy. Sound familiar?
Open societies are run by outside elites, not by a country’s own citizens
Soros quote: “[Combatting closed societies] involves the building of democratic states and open societies and embedding them in a structure which precludes certain kinds of behaviour.”
This point is perhaps the most ironic one. A “democracy” according to George Soros is not decided by its own citizens. Instead, NATO’s new mission is to impose their own ideology on others and build countries which agree with Soros.
Military intervention can transform a country into an open society
Soros quote: “Only in case of failure does the prospect of military intervention arise.”
Translation: If bribing a country with an endless amount of foreign aid doesn’t work to transform them from the inside out, then NATO will intervene. And that’s exactly what NATO did with Bosnia in 1994.
The new purpose of NATO is to assimilate countries as open societies
Soros: “Therefore, if NATO has any mission at all, it is to project its power and influence into the region, and the mission is best defined in terms of open and closed societies.”
Translation: NATO’s new job is not to defend member states, but to expand its presence eastward and actively shape the internal politics of neighbouring states, especially the post-Soviet bloc.
Open society is the model under whicd Uniparty and NGOs operate
This isn’t a theoretical essay. Washington implemented the playbook.
1994: Partnership for Peace launched.
1999: NATO admits Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic.
2004: Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Bulgaria join.
2008–2022: Ukraine, Georgia seek NATO pathway.
2023: Finland joins NATO, Sweden follows.
Why did everyone go along with this model?
Simple. Enormous amounts of money are involved. Here’s a list who benefited:
NGO Networks (Open Society Foundations, USAID, NED). More influence, more contracts, more justification for expansion.
Bureaucrats & Diplomats. Career advancement via “democracy-building” missions.
International Donors & Foundations. Steer reforms through grant-making power.
IMF and World Bank. Lend to reforming nations in exchange for austerity and influence.
Private Equity & Multinationals. Buy up privatised industries on the cheap (telecoms, oil, infrastructure).
Western-Aligned Politicians. Receive aid, praise, and protection … even if they’re corrupt or undemocratic.
Post-Communist Oligarchs. Enrich themselves through Western-advised privatisation.
Journalists and Activists. Funded by Western grants, shielded from local accountability.
Professors and Think Tanks. Get fellowships, scholarships and media access for pushing “open” values.
Big Tech. Enter new markets post-liberalisation (data access, censorship tools, ad revenue).
Mainstream Media. Shape narratives, control legitimacy labels: “reformer” vs “strongman.”
And if you dare to cut off that money spigot … in other words, if you practice any kind of populist principles or try and assert agency for your own nation: You are an enemy of democracy. Because George Soros said so.
Featured image taken from ‘George Soros contributes $18 billion to his Open Society Foundation’, Campagne Québec-Vie, 11 January 2017
Related articles:
Hes a lunatic aswell as the rest of the cabal caput draconis
Put him away and throw away the key