The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
10 Points

Do the Freemasons run your world?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/22/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,495 times Debate No: 49676
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (2)




All evidence points to the fact that the organization sworn to secrecy and world domination called The Freemasons run the world. Is it true?


No, it is not true, Freemasons do not run the world. I now await your argument.
Debate Round No. 1


If you know who runs it do tell...


My opponent has made the claim that Freemasons run the world. I will consider the BOP equally shared, meaning I must prove that Freemasons are not the rulers of this world, while my opponent must prove that they do run the world. There is an important observation I wish to make before beginning. First, there are two manners in which I can approach this:

I can look at this topic in an objective way in which I would exclude all unverifiable information. This means that I would argue that The United States Government, along with other governing leaders of world, are the ones who run this world. But as we all know, not everything is so black and white. This brings me to the second manner in which I can approach this topic, a subjective one using methods that cannot ever truly be verified - not because it is unverifiable, but because the true rulers of this world are essentially in positions that would never infer that they are the ones pulling the strings on the world stage. I believe my opponent would appreciate if I took this second route, being that the very nature of such a claim made by my opponent implies that he is open to such an idea.

The last thing I wish to state are my credentials for making such unpopular claims. My family can trace its roots in Freemasonry back to 1731 when my great (x7) granduncle was initiated into the craft. The family on my fathers side is also one that can be considered 'Texas Big Oil' meaning that I come from a family line of wealthy philanthropists, leaders of industry and insider perspective when it comes to belonging to a certain class of people within this society. My great grandfather served as President for the Association of Former Intelligence Officers as well as ascending to the 32nd degree of his York Rite path which comes with the title, 'Sublime Prince of the Royal Secret'. Personally, I petitioned when I turned 18 and have remained inactive while finishing my college education. Now, I will present my argument.

I. Hierarchy of The New World Order.

Many have claimed that within this world there is a new world order. Before I can begin to flesh out the hierarchy of this New World Order I must first prove the validity of my claim that there is indeed one. I will attach a YouTube video that consists of a compilation of clips showing current and past world leaders openly stating that their is a New World Order that exists within our world. [1] Please watch the attached YouTube video now to verify my claim.

Now that you have seen world leaders admitting that there is indeed a New World Order that exists in our world today, it is imperative that we flesh out who the commanding entities are and how exactly the hierarchy is set up. The easiest way to do this would be to view it as a pyramid of power - with the mass population of the world making up the extremely wide base of the pyramid and the ruling elite at the very top point of that pyramid. The power is a trickle-down system similar to the natural flow of a mountain waterfall making its way down stream eventually widening and opening to the sea. [2] [3]

At the top of the chart shown by links [2] & [3], one can see that this world consists of a ruling monarch which oversees the council of 13. The ruling monarch itself is not, nor can be, ever known with surety so I will exclude any claims I might make in attempting to identify this person - although I suspect it is whomever holds the most power out of all the council of 13. The council of 13 is known by many names and can be seen on Google searches with several inconsistencies in naming which ruling families preside over the cherished 13 positions of extreme power. For the sake of this argument, I will go with the most consistent members who seem to always be on this list. [4]

Those families are:

Rothschild (Bauer)




Cavendish (Kennedy)


De Medici

Du Pont



Hapsburg (Habsburg)










Sinclair (St Clair)


Warburg (del Banco)

van Duyn

Windsor (Saxe-Coburg-Gothe)

Merovingian (European Dynasty)

While I do not have the room to flesh out how these older families from the left side of the list have bred into the modern families which make up the right side of the list, if one spends enough time researching - they can see for themselves how important lineage and inter-breeding is within the families of great wealth in order to keep certain blood-lines in continuation. Each of these families have untold amounts of wealth, power and influence when it comes to shaping the direction of our world. Many of them are essentially the 'kings' of their respective industries that reach across the globe.

Beneath them you have the Committee of 300 which consists of the worlds most powerful sub-families.
The theory dates to a statement made by Walther Rathenau in a 1909 article "Geschäftlicher Nachwuchs" in Neue freie Presse [5]:

Dreihundert Männer, von denen jeder jeden kennt, leiten die wirtschaftliche Geschicke des Kontinents und suchen sich Nachfolger aus ihrer Umgebung.

This could be translated as "Three hundred men, all of whom know one another, guide the economic destinies of the Continent and seek their successors from within their own environment."

Former British MI6 intelligence officer John Coleman's book, The Conspirators Hierarchy, the Committee of 300, [6] details what Coleman claims is his first-hand information and encounters with this group. Coleman claims the alleged group to be superior to other more well-known round table groups such as the Bilderberg Group, the Royal Institute of International Affairs, the Club of Rome, the Trilateral Commission and the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). [7] Coleman's book has been translated into German, Russian , Serbian and Bulgarian. The list of current membership is something which cannot be accuritely verfied due to the nature of secrecy pertaining to involvement with such a group. Nonetheless, I will include a link to the individuals considered to be members of this committee of 300. [8] Upon analysis of the list, it is not very surprising to see some extremely powerful individuals listed as members.










II. Freemasonry fails to be acknowledged as belonging to the top tier of the NWO power structure.

In both images I have shared above, [2] & [3], one can see that Freemasonry is not listed within the top tiers of the power structures. A more accurate depiction of the position where Freemasonry falls under can be found in the images I've linked here: [9] & [10].

As one can see, Freemasonry falls under the category of "Societies" controlled by the upper echelon. While many members of the fraternity of men known as Freemasons do indeed rise to positions of power, I have shown that they are not the top tier of the NWO power structure.



In conclusion,

I have shown the audience that Freemasons are not the rulers of this world. In making this argument I have proven my opponents claim to be false. I want to thank my opponent for allowing me to present my argument and look forward to making any rebuttals against his own when he presents his argument.

Debate Round No. 2


toootrooo forfeited this round.


My opponent has forfeited his last round, thus my arguments stand unchallenged.

With no argument to provide rebuttals for - I will now thank my opponent for the opportunity to share this information. I look forward to any and all challenges from my opponent in the future. Thank you.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Blade-of-Truth 6 years ago
Freemasonry is not Satanic. In fact, a belief in Satan really only comes into play if one subscribes to Christian mythology. Not all Freemasons are Christian - some are Jewish, Muslim, Mormon, Agnostic and Buddhist. When it comes to Freemasons, the only belief we truly share in common is a belief in a higher power - most commonly referred to as The Grand Architect of the Universe for neutrality.

I must caution you against being so gullible to popular culture myths involving Freemasonry. This new fascination with the Illuminati that has somehow overtaken all forms of popular culture are ultimately nothing but rumors that have spread uncontrollably. I would tell you that if you visited your local lodge you would quickly find that your assumptions about Freemasonry are simply unfounded.

I do not bash your religion or the beliefs formed from Christian mythology, so I ask that you please show me the same respect before making any further baseless claims.
Posted by LifeMeansGodIsGood 6 years ago
Freemasonry is Satanic, it's devil worship, working to bring about the kingdom of the anti-christ who will rule the world for a brief period. Freemasonry is nothing but an attempt by people to gain positions of power in the coming kingdom of the one-worlld dictator, the anti-christ.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Relativist 6 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Con's easy to follow classifications is worth 4 points but I have no choice but to follow the voting system. Conduct due to forfeiture of pro. Con's arguments was structured properly, easy to follow and thus gets 3 points. All this along with proper sources, gets an overall 6.
Vote Placed by Xerge 6 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Con was the only one that presented a case. Conduct to con for the forfeit

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.