Recently by Andrew Gavin Marshall: The Logic of Imperial Insanity and the Road to WorldWarIII
To say we were striving for a one-world government is exaggerated, but not wholly unfair. Those of us in Bilderberg felt we couldn’t go on forever fighting one another for nothing and killing people and rendering millions homeless. So we felt that a single community throughout the world would be a good thing.
~ Denis Healey, 30-year member of the Steering Committee of the Bilderberg Group
The Foundations of the Bilderberg Group
The Bilderberg Group, formed in 1954, was founded in the Netherlands as a secretive meeting held once a year, drawing roughly 130 of the political-financial-military-academic-media elites from North America and Western Europe as an informal network of influential people who could consult each other privately and confidentially. Regular participants include the CEOs or Chairman of some of the largest corporations in the world, oil companies such as Royal Dutch Shell, British Petroleum, and Total SA, as well as various European monarchs, international bankers such as David Rockefeller, major politicians, presidents, prime ministers, and central bankers of the world. The Bilderberg Group acts as a secretive global think-tank, with an original intent to to link governments and economies in Europe and North America amid the Cold War.
In the early 1950s, top European elites worked with selected American elites to form the Bilderberg Group in an effort to bring together the most influential people from both sides of the Atlantic to advance the cause of Atlanticism and globalism. The list of attendees were the usual suspects: top politicians, international businessmen, bankers, leaders of think tanks and foundations, top academics and university leaders, diplomats, media moguls, military officials, and Bilderberg also included several heads of state, monarchs, as well as senior intelligence officials, including top officials of the CIA, which was the main financier for the first meeting in 1954.
The European founders of the Bilderberg Group included Joseph Retinger and Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands. Prince Bernhard had, incidentally, been a member of the Nazi Party until 1934, three years prior to his marrying the Dutch Queen Juliana, and had also worked for the German industrial giant, I.G. Farben, the maker of Zyklon B, the gas used in concentration camps. On the American side, those who were most prominent in the formation of the Bilderberg Group were David Rockefeller, Dean Rusk (a top official with the Council on Foreign Relations who was then the head of the Rockefeller Foundation), Joseph Johnson (another Council leader who was head of the Carnegie Endowment), and John J. McCloy (a top Council leader who became Chairman of Chase Manhattan Bank in 1953 and was also Chairman of the Board of the Ford Foundation).
The fact that the major American foundations Rockefeller, Carnegie, and Ford were so pivotal in the origins of the Bilderberg Group is not a mere coincidence. The foundations have, since their founding at the beginning of the 20th century, been the central institutions in constructing consensus among elites, and creating consent to power. They are, in short, the engines of social engineering: both for elite circles specifically, and society as a whole, more generally. As Professor of Education Robert F. Arnove wrote in his book Philanthropy and Cultural Imperialism:
Foundations like Carnegie, Rockefeller, and Ford have a corrosive influence on a democratic society; they represent relatively unregulated and unaccountable concentrations of power and wealth which buy talent, promote causes, and, in effect, establish an agenda of what merits societys attention. They serve as cooling-out agencies, delaying and preventing more radical, structural change. They help maintain an economic and political order, international in scope, which benefits the ruling-class interests of philanthropists and philanthropoids a system which… has worked against the interests of minorities, the working class, and Third World peoples.
These foundations had been central in promoting the ideology of globalism that laid the groundwork for organizations such as the Council on Foreign Relations and the Bilderberg Group to exist. The Rockefeller Foundation, in particular, supported several organizations that promoted a liberal internationalist philosophy, the aim of which:
was to support a foreign policy within a new world order that was to feature the United States as the leading power a programme defined by the Rockefeller Foundation as disinterested, objective and even non-political… The construction of a new internationalist consensus required the conscious, targeted funding of individuals and organizations who questioned and undermined the supporters of the old order while simultaneously promoting the new.
The major foundations funded and created not only policy-oriented institutes such as think tanks, but they were also pivotal in the organization and construction of universities and education itself, in particular, the study of international relations. The influence of foundations over education and universities and thus, knowledge itself, is unparalleled. As noted in the book, Philanthropy and Cultural Imperialism:
The power of the foundation is not that of dictating what will be studied. Its power consists in defining professional and intellectual parameters, in determining who will receive support to study what subjects in what settings. And the foundations power resides in suggesting certain types of activities it favors and is willing to support. As [political theorist and economist Harold] Laski noted, the foundations do not control, simply because, in the direct and simple sense of the word, there is no need for them to do so. They have only to indicate the immediate direction of their minds for the whole university world to discover that it always meant to gravitate to that angle of the intellectual compass.
The major philanthropic foundations created by Americas robber baron industrialists and bankers were established not to benefit mankind, as was their stated purpose, but to benefit the bankers and industrialist elites in order to engage in social engineering. Through banks, these powerful families controlled the global economy; through think tanks, they manage the political and foreign policy establishments; and through foundations, they engineer society itself according to their own designs and interests. Through these foundations, elites have come to shape the processes, ideas and institutions of education, thus ensuring their continued hegemony over society through the production and control of knowledge. The educational institutions train future elites for government, economics, sciences, and other professional environments, as well as producing the academics that make up the principle component of think tanks, such as the Bilderberg Group.
Foundations effectively blur boundaries between the public and private sectors, while simultaneously effecting the separation of such areas in the study of social sciences. This boundary erosion between public and private spheres adds feudal elements to our purported democracy, yet it has not been resisted, protested, or even noted much by political elites or social scientists. Zbigniew Brzezinski, foreign policy strategist, former director of the Council on Foreign Relations, Bilderberg member and co-founder with David Rockefeller of the Trilateral Commission, wrote that the blurring of boundaries serves United States world dominance:
As the imitation of American ways gradually pervades the world, it creates a more congenial setting for the exercise of the indirect and seemingly consensual American hegemony. And as in the case of the domestic American system, that hegemony involves a complex structure of interlocking institutions and procedures, designed to generate consensus and obscure asymmetries in power and influence.
In 1915, a Congressional investigation into the power of philanthropic foundations took place, named the Walsh Commission, which warned that, the power of wealth could overwhelm democratic culture and politics. The Final Report of the Walsh Commission suggested that foundations would be more likely to pursue their own ideology in society than social objectivity. In this context, we can come to understand the evolution of the Bilderberg Group as an international think tank aimed at constructing consensus and entrenching ideology among the elite.
At their first meeting, Bilderbergers covered the following broad areas, which remained focal points of discussion for successive meetings: Communism and the Soviet Union; Dependent areas and peoples overseas; Economic policies and problems; and European integration and the European Defense Community.
Nearly every single American participant in the Bilderberg meetings was also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. Among the notable American members of the Bilderberg Group in its early years were David Rockefeller, Dean Rusk, John J. McCloy, George McGhee, George Ball, Walt Whitman Rostow, McGeorge Bundy, Arthur Dean, and Paul Nitze. As Political Scientist Stephen Gill wrote, Prominent in the American section were the network of Rockefeller interests.
Certainly, while Rothschild interests have remained in the Bilderberg Group, as evidenced by Edmond de Rothschild having been a member of the Steering Committee, and Franco Bernabe, Vice Chairman of Rothschild Europe being a current Steering Committee member, the Rockefeller interests seem to be most dominant. Not only is David Rockefeller sitting as the single individual of the Member Advisory Group of the Steering Committee, but close Rockefeller confidantes have long served on the Steering Committee and been affiliated with the organization, such as: Sharon Percy Rockefeller; George Ball, a long-time leader in the Council on Foreign Relations, who was Undersecretary of State for Economic Affairs in the Kennedy and Johnson administrations; Henry Kissinger, long-time Rockefeller aide and American imperial strategist; Zbigniew Brzezinski, who co-founded the Trilateral Commission with David Rockefeller; Joseph E. Johnson, former U.S. State Department official and President of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace; John J. McCloy, former Chairman the Council on Foreign Relations (superceded by David Rockefeller), former Assistant Secretary of War, Chairman of Chase Manhattan Bank (where he was superceded by David Rockefeller), former Trustee of the Rockefeller Foundation, Chairman of the Ford Foundation, and President of the World Bank; and James Wolfensohn, former President of the World Bank and Trustee of the Rockefeller Foundation.
One current Steering Committee member, who is representative of not only a continuation of Rockefeller interests, but also of the continuing influence and role of the major foundations is Jessica T. Matthews. She is President of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, who had served on the National Security Council under Zbigniew Brzezinski, was a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations (at which David Rockefeller remains as Honorary Chairman), is a member of the Trilateral Commission, is a trustee of the Rockefeller Foundation, and has served on the boards of the Brookings Institution, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund and the Joyce Foundation.
Bilderberg and the European Union
Joseph Retinger, one of the founders of the Bilderberg Group, was also one of the original architects of the European Common Market and a leading intellectual champion of European integration. In 1946, he told the Royal Institute of International Affairs (the British counterpart and sister organization of the Council on Foreign Relations), that Europe needed to create a federal union and for European countries to relinquish part of their sovereignty. Retinger was a founder of the European Movement (EM), a lobbying organization dedicated to creating a federal Europe. Retinger secured financial support for the European Movement from powerful US financial interests such as the Council on Foreign Relations and the Rockefellers. Important to note is that following World War II, the CFRs main finances came from the Carnegie Corporation, Ford Foundation and most especially, the Rockefeller Foundation.
Apart from Retinger, the founder of the Bilderberg Group and the European Movement, another ideological founder of European integration was Jean Monnet, who founded the Action Committee for a United States of Europe (ACUE), an organization dedicated to promoting European integration, and he was also the major promoter and first president of the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC), the precursor to the European Common Market.
Declassified documents (released in 2001) showed that the US intelligence community ran a campaign in the Fifties and Sixties to build momentum for a united Europe. It funded and directed the European federalist movement. The documents revealed that, America was working aggressively behind the scenes to push Britain into a European state. One memorandum, dated July 26, 1950, gives instructions for a campaign to promote a fully-fledged European parliament. It is signed by Gen William J Donovan, head of the American wartime Office of Strategic Services, precursor of the CIA. Further, Washington’s main tool for shaping the European agenda was the American Committee for a United Europe, created in 1948. The chairman was Donovan, ostensibly a private lawyer by then, and the vice-chairman was Allen Dulles, the CIA director in the Fifties. The board included Walter Bedell Smith, the CIA’s first director, and a roster of ex-OSS figures and officials who moved in and out of the CIA. The documents show that ACUE financed the European Movement, the most important federalist organisation in the post-war years. Interestingly, the leaders of the European Movement – Retinger, the visionary Robert Schuman and the former Belgian prime minister Paul-Henri Spaak – were all treated as hired hands by their American sponsors. The US role was handled as a covert operation. ACUE’s funding came from the Ford and Rockefeller foundations as well as business groups with close ties to the US government.
The European Coal and Steel Community was formed in 1951, and signed by France, West Germany, Italy, Belgium, Luxembourg and the Netherlands. Newly released documents from the 1955 Bilderberg meeting show that a main topic of discussion was European Unity, and that the discussion affirmed complete support for the idea of integration and unification from the representatives of all the six nations of the Coal and Steel Community present at the conference. Further, A European speaker expressed concern about the need to achieve a common currency, and indicated that in his view this necessarily implied the creation of a central political authority. Interestingly, a United States participant confirmed that the United States had not weakened in its enthusiastic support for the idea of integration, although there was considerable diffidence in America as to how this enthusiasm should be manifested. Another United States participant urged his European friends to go ahead with the unification of Europe with less emphasis upon ideological considerations and, above all, to be practical and work fast. Thus, at the 1955 Bilderberg Group meeting, they set as a primary agenda, the creation of a European common market.
In 1957, two years later, the Treaty of Rome was signed, which created the European Economic Community (EEC), also known as the European Community. Over the decades, various other treaties were signed, and more countries joined the European Community. In 1992, the Maastricht Treaty was signed, which created the European Union and led to the creation of the Euro. The European Monetary Institute was created in 1994, the European Central Bank was founded in 1998, and the Euro was launched in 1999. Etienne Davignon, Chairman of the Bilderberg Group and former EU Commissioner, revealed in March of 2009 that the Euro was debated and planned at Bilderberg conferences.
The European Constitution (renamed the Lisbon Treaty) was a move towards creating a European superstate, creating an EU foreign minister, and with it, coordinated foreign policy, with the EU taking over the seat of Britain on the UN Security Council, representing all EU member states, forcing the nations to actively and unreservedly follow an EU foreign policy; set out the framework to create an EU defence policy, as an appendage to or separate from NATO; the creation of a European Justice system, with the EU defining minimum standards in defining offences and setting sentences, and creates common asylum and immigration policy; and it would also hand over to the EU the power to ensure co-ordination of economic and employment policies; and EU law would supercede all law of the member states, thus making the member nations relative to mere provinces within a centralized federal government system.
The Constitution was largely written up by Valéry Giscard dEstaing, former President of the French Republic from 1974 to 1981. Giscard dEstaing also happens to be a member of the Bidlerberg Group, the Trilateral Commission, and is also a close friend of Henry Kissinger, having co-authored papers with him.
The Treaty, passed in 2009, created the position of President of the European Council, who represents the EU on the world stage and leads the Council, which determines the political direction of the EU. The first President of the European Council is Herman Van Rompuy, former Prime Minister of Belgium. On November 12, 2009, a small Bilderberg meeting took place, hosted by Viscount Etienne Davignon (Chairman of the Bilderberg Group), and including international policymakers and industrialists, among them, Henry Kissinger. Herman Von Rompuy attended the Bilderberg session to audition for the European job, calling for a new system of levies to fund the EU and replace the perennial EU budget battles. Following his selection as President, Van Rompuy gave a speech in which he stated, We are going through exceptionally difficult times: the financial crisis and its dramatic impact on employment and budgets, the climate crisis which threatens our very survival; a period of anxiety, uncertainty, and lack of confidence. Yet, these problems can be overcome by a joint effort in and between our countries. 2009 is also the first year of global governance with the establishment of the G20 in the middle of the financial crisis; the climate conference in Copenhagen is another step towards the global management of our planet.
As indicated from leaks of the recent 2011 Bilderberg meeting in Switzerland, the euro-zone is in a major crisis, and Bilderberg members are struggling to keep the house of glass from shattering to pieces. One major subject discussed at this years meeting, according to Bilderberg investigative journalist, Daniel Estulin (who reportedly has inside sources in the meetings who leak information, which has proved quite accurate in the past), the Bilderberg meeting discussed the situation of Greece, which is likely to only get worse, with another bailout on the horizon, continuing social unrest, and a possible abandonment of the euro. The problems of Greece, Ireland and the wider global economy as a whole were featured in this years discussions. Representatives from Greece this year included George Papaconstantinou, the Greek Minister of Finance, among several bankers and businessmen.
Among the EU power players attending this years meeting was the first President of the European Council, Herman van Rompuy, who was appointed as President following an invitation to a private Bilderberg meeting in November of 2009, at which he gave a speech advocating for EU-wide taxes, allowing the EU to not rely exclusively upon its member nations, but have its own resources. Van Rompuy, who previously stated that, 2009 is also the first year of global governance, is no surprise guest at Bilderberg. Other key EU officials who attended this years meeting were Joaquín Almunia, a Vice President of the European Commission; Frans van Daele, Chief of Staff to European Council President Van Rompuy; Neelie Kroes, a Vice President of the European Commission; and of course, Jean-Claude Trichet, President of the European Central Bank.
As with each meeting, there is the official list of participants, and then there are those participants who attend, but whose names are not listed in any official release. At this years meeting, some reports indicate that attendees whose names were not listed included NATO Secretary-General Anders Rasmussen, which is not surprising considering that the NATO Secretary-General has generally been present at every meeting; Jose Luis Zapatero, Spanish Prime Minister; Angela Merkel, German Chancellor; Bill Gates, Co-Chairman of Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and former Microsoft CEO; and Robert Gates, the outgoing U.S. Secretary of Defense. The Guardian also reported that these unofficial guests were spotted at the conference or had their attendance leaked. Angela Merkel has reportedly attended meetings in the past, which would make her current attendance less than surprising.
At the recent meeting, EU officials were discussing the need for the EU to undertake a massive power grab in the face of the massive economic crisis facing Europe and indeed the world. Without such a power grab, the euro and indeed the Union itself would likely collapse; a scenario anathema to everything the Bilderberg group has tried to achieve in its 57-year history. The aim, put simply, would be to have the EU police itself and the nations of the Union, with the ability to punish nations for not following the rules, and as one Bilderberger reportedly stated at the meeting, What we are heading towards a form of real economic government. Now while this statement cannot be independently verified, there is much documentation within the public record that several of the European attendees at the meeting could have easily made such a statement.
Prior to the meeting, European Central Bank President, Jean-Claude Trichet, said governments should consider setting up a finance ministry for the 17-nation currency region as the bloc struggles to contain a region-wide sovereign debt crisis. Trichet asked: Would it be too bold, in the economic field, with a single market, a single currency and a single central bank, to envisage a ministry of finance of the union? Further in line with this thought, and with the ideas laid out in the Bilderberg meeting in favour of a power grab, Trichet said he supports giving the European Union powers to veto the budget measures of countries that go harmfully astray, though that would require a change to EU Treaties. Such a finance ministry would, according to Trichet, exert direct responsibilities in at least three domains:
They would include "first, the surveillance of both fiscal policies and competitiveness policies" and "direct responsibilities" for countries in fiscal distress, he said. It would also carry out "all the typical responsibilities of the executive branches as regards the union’s integrated financial sector, so as to accompany the full integration of financial services, and third, the representation of the union confederation in international financial institutions."
Last year, Belgian Prime Minister Yves Leterme endorsed such an idea of a European Economic Government when he stated:
The idea of strengthened economic government has been put on the table and will make progress. In the end, the European Debt Agency or something like it will become a reality. Im convinced of this. Its about Europes financial stability and its not an ideological debate about federalism. I myself am a federalist. But more integration and deeper integration are simply logical consequences of having a single currency.
This is of course, not surprising, considering that Letermes predecessor is Herman van Rompuy, the current Bilderberg participant and EU President, a strong-headed advocate of an economic government and global governance. The plans for an economic government require the strong commitment of both France and Germany, which may explain Merkels reported appearance at Bilderberg. In March of 2010, the German and French governments released a draft outline that would strengthen financial policy coordination in the EU. The plan, seen by German publication Der Spiegel, calls for increased monitoring of individual member states’ competitiveness so that action can be taken early on should problems emerge. Luxembourg Prime Minister Jean-Claude Juncker stated in response to the plan, We need a European economic government in the sense of strengthened coordination of economic policy within the euro zone. In December of 2010, German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schaeuble stated that, In 10 years we will have a structure that corresponds much stronger to what one describes as political union.
As reported by the German press in early 2011, Germany and France were split on several aspects of such an economic government. However, as Merkel stated, We have obviously been discussing the issue of an economic government for a long time, and that, What we are currently envisioning goes yet another step in this direction. Yet, the differences between the two approaches are mainly as follows:
France would prefer to see the European Council, which comprises the heads of state and government of the EU’s member states, turned into a kind of economic government. Since only euro-zone member countries would be involved initially, French Finance Minister [and past Bilderberg participant] Christine Lagarde has dubbed the project "16 plus."
The Germans are focused on completely different things. Their preference would be to see the current rescue fund replaced by the so-called European Stability Mechanism in 2013. According to this arrangement, in return for any help, cash-strapped countries would have to subject themselves to a strict cost-cutting regimen.
Mario Draghi is the current President of the Bank of Italy, as well as a board member of the Bank for International Settlements the BIS (the central bank to the worlds central banks). In an interview posted on the website of the BIS in March of 2010, Mario Draghi stated that in response to the Greek crisis, In the euro area we need a stronger economic governance providing for more coordinated structural reforms and more discipline. Mario Draghi also attended the 2009 conference of the Bilderberg Group. Perhaps unsurprisingly, Mario Draghi has been backed by the euro-area finance ministers to be the successor to Jean-Claude Trichet at the European Central Bank, who is due to step down in October of 2011.
Certainly, the objective of a European economic government will continue throughout the coming years, especially as the economic crisis continues. As Dominique Strauss-Kahn, outgoing Managing Director of the IMF and long-time Bilderberg participant stated, crisis is an opportunity. Bilderberg, while not omnipotent by any means, will do all in its ability to prevent the collapse of the euro or the ending of the European Union. Bilderberg has, after all, from its very beginning, made European integration one of its central objectives. In an official biography of Bilderberg-founder and long-time Chairman Prince Bernhard, the Bilderberg Group was credited as the birthplace of the European Community.
Regime Change at the IMF?
Christine Lagarde, the French Finance Minister who has been pivotal in the process towards drafting and proposing a European economic government, is also considered the front-runner for the job of Managing Director of the IMF. The Managing Director of the IMF is always in attendance at Bilderberg meetings, except for this year, considering outgoing director Dominique Strauss-Kahn is facing sexual assault charges in New York; yet, the top job is usually set aside for those who have been invited to at least one meeting of the Bilderberg Group. While the race has yet to finish, perhaps it is noteworthy that Christine Lagarde attended a Bilderberg meeting in 2009. Could this make her the supreme choice, or is there a surprise in the near future?
A Place for China in the New World Order?
Investigative journalist Daniel Estulins report of inside sources in this years meeting indicated a rather extensive discussion on the role of China, which is hardly surprising, considering this has been a central topic of discussion in meetings for a number of years. China emerged in discussions on Pakistan, as China has become increasingly Pakistans closest economic and strategic ally, a trend that is continuing as America continues to spread the Afghan war into neighbouring Pakistan. China is also a major player in Africa, threatening the Wests stranglehold over the continent, in particular through the World Bank and IMF. Most importantly, however, and not unrelated to its role in Pakistan and Africa, China has become the greatest economic competitor for the United States in the world, and as the IMF even admitted recently, its economy is expected to surpass that of the United States by 2016. Bilderberg paid attention to this issue not simply as a financial-economic consideration, but as a massive geopolitical transition in the world: the biggest story of our time.
What made the discussion on China at this years meeting unique was that it actually included two attendees from China for the first time ever. The two guests were Huang Yiping, a prominent economics professor at Peking University (Chinas Harvard), and Fu Ying, Chinas Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs. This is especially unusual and telling of the importance of the discussion at hand, considering that Bilderberg is exclusively a European and North American (Atlantic) organization, and in the past, when Bilderberg memebers David Rockefeller and Zbigniew Brzezinski suggested Japan be allowed to join in 1972, the European rejected the proposition, and instead the Trilateral Commission was formed in 1973 to integrate the elites of Western Europe, North America, and Japan. The Trilateral Commission eventually expanded the Japanese section of the group into a Pacific Asian Group in 2000 to include not only Japan, but South Korea, Australia, New Zealand, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, and Thailand.
In 2009 the G20 was endowed with the task of managing the global economic crisis to include the emerging economic giants, notably China and India and as Bilderberg member Jean-Claude Trichet stated, this marked the emergence of the G20 as the prime group for global economic governance. That same year the newly-appointed European Union President Herman van Rompuy declared to be the first year of global governance. No surprise then, that also in 2009, China and India were invited as official members of the Trilateral Commission. This indicates a growing role for India and especially China in global affairs, and participation in Bilderberg meetings emphasizes the aim to not alienate China from the established institutions, ideologies and systems of global power, but to more fully integrate China within that system. The aim of the global elite, perhaps best represented by Bilderberg, is not to allow for the collapse of the American empire and the rise of a new one; rather, it is to manage the collapse of American hegemony into an entirely new system of global governance. This big idea is not possible without the participation of China, and thus, as Bilderberg has long been saturated with the ideology of global governance, it cannot be seen as too surprising to see China invited. Perhaps the surprise should be that it simply took this long.
Is Bilderberg Building a Global Government?
Jon Ronson wrote an article for the Guardian paper in which he managed to interview key members of the Bilderberg Group for an exposé on the organization, attempting to dismantle the conspiracy theories surrounding the secrecy of the meetings. However, through his interviews, important information regarding the social importance of the group continued to emerge. Ronson attempted to contact David Rockefeller, but only managed to reach his press secretary who told Ronson that the conspiracy theories about Rockefeller and global think-tanks such as Bilderberg in general left David Rockefeller thoroughly fed up. According to his press secretary, Mr. Rockefeller’s conclusion was that this was a battle between rational and irrational thought. Rational people favoured globalisation. Irrational people preferred nationalism.
While dismissing conspiracy theories that Bilderberg runs the world, Ronson did explain that the Bilderberg members he interviewed admitted, that international affairs had, from time to time, been influenced by these sessions. As Denis Healey, a 30-year member of the Steering Committee, himself pointedly explained:
To say we were striving for a one-world government is exaggerated, but not wholly unfair. Those of us in Bilderberg felt we couldn’t go on forever fighting one another for nothing and killing people and rendering millions homeless. So we felt that a single community throughout the world would be a good thing… Bilderberg is a way of bringing together politicians, industrialists, financiers and journalists. Politics should involve people who aren’t politicians. We make a point of getting along younger politicians who are obviously rising, to bring them together with financiers and industrialists who offer them wise words. It increases the chance of having a sensible global policy.
Will Hutton, the former editor of the Observer, who had been invited to Bilderberg meetings in the past, once famously referred to the group as the high priests of globalization. Hutton has said that people take part in these networks in order to influence the way the world works, and to create, as he put it, the international common sense of policy. The Chairman of the Bilderberg Group, Viscount Etienne Davignon, stated that, I don’t think (we are) a global ruling class because I don’t think a global ruling class exists. I simply think it’s people who have influence interested to speak to other people who have influence.
G. William Domhoff is a professor of Psychology and Sociology at the University of California, Santa Cruz, and has written about the Bilderberg Group. In an interview, he discounted the notion that the study of such groups is relegated to the realm of conspiracy theory, and instead explained that he studies how elites strive to develop consensus, which is through such publicly observable organizations as corporate boards and the policy-planning network, which can be studied in detail, and which are reported on in the media in at least a halfway accurate manner.
Bilderbergers have long been advocates of global governance and global government, and crisis is always an excellent means through which to advance their agendas. Just as the Greek crisis has stepped up calls for the formation of a European economic government, an idea which has been sought out for much longer than Greece has been in crisis, so too is the global economic crisis an excuse to advance the cause of global economic governance. Outgoing Managing Director of the IMF, Dominique Strauss-Kahn, stated in May of 2010 that, crisis is an opportunity, and he called for a new global currency issued by a global central bank, with robust governance and institutional features, and that the global central bank could also serve as a lender of last resort. However, he stated, I fear we are still very far from that level of global collaboration. Unless, of course, the world continues to descend into economic and financial ruin, as any astute economic observer would likely warn is taking place.
Following the April 2009 G20 summit, plans were announced for implementing the creation of a new global currency to replace the US dollars role as the world reserve currency. Point 19 of the communiqué released by the G20 at the end of the Summit stated, We have agreed to support a general SDR allocation which will inject $250bn (£170bn) into the world economy and increase global liquidity. SDRs, or Special Drawing Rights, are a synthetic paper currency issued by the International Monetary Fund. As the Telegraph reported, the G20 leaders have activated the IMF’s power to create money and begin global quantitative easing. In doing so, they are putting a de facto world currency into play. It is outside the control of any sovereign body. The Washington Post reported that the IMF is poised to transform into a veritable United Nations for the global economy:
It would have vastly expanded authority to act as a global banker to governments rich and poor. And with more flexibility to effectively print its own money, it would have the ability to inject liquidity into global markets in a way once limited to major central banks, including the U.S. Federal Reserve… the IMF is all but certain to take a central role in managing the world economy. As a result, Washington is poised to become the power center for global financial policy, much as the United Nations has long made New York the world center for diplomacy.
While the IMF is pushed to the forefront of the global currency agenda, the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) remains as the true authority in terms of global governance overall. As the IMFs magazine, Finance and Development, stated in 2009, the Bank for International Settlements (BIS), established in 1930, is the central and the oldest focal point for coordination of global governance arrangements. Jean-Claude Trichet, President of the European Central Bank (ECB) and long-time Bilderberg participant, gave a speech at the Council on Foreign Relations in April of 2010 in which he explained that, the significant transformation of global governance that we are engineering today is illustrated by three examples:
First, the emergence of the G20 as the prime group for global economic governance at the level of ministers, governors and heads of state or government. Second, the establishment of the Global Economy Meeting of central bank governors under the auspices of the BIS as the prime group for the governance of central bank cooperation. And third, the extension of Financial Stability Board membership to include all the systemic emerging market economies.
In concluding his speech, Trichet emphasized that, global governance is of the essence to improve decisively the resilience of the global financial system. The following month, Trichet spoke at the Bank of Korea, where he said, central bank cooperation is part of a more general trend that is reshaping global governance, and which has been spurred by the global financial crisis, and that, it is therefore not surprising that the crisis has led to even better recognition of their increased economic importance and need for full integration into global governance. Once again, Trichet identified the BIS and its various fora such as the Global Economy Meeting and the Financial Stability Board as the main channel for central bank cooperation.
For more on Global Government and the global economic crisis, see: Andrew Gavin Marshall, Crisis is an Opportunity: Engineering a Global Depression to Create a Global Government, Global Research, 26 October 2010.
David Rockefeller celebrated his 96th birthday during last weekends Bilderberg meeting, and is one of if not the only remaining original founders of the group in 1954. If the Bilderberg Group represents the high priests of globalization, then David Rockefeller is the Pope.
James Wolfensohn represents the importance of the Rockefellers to not only America, but to the whole process of globalization. James D. Wolfensohn, an Australian national, was President of the World Bank from 1995-2005, and has since founded and leads his private firm, Wolfensohn & Company, LLC. He has also been a long-time Steering Committee member of the Bilderberg Group, and has served as an Honorary Trustee of the Brookings Institution, a major American think tank, as well as a Trustee of the Rockefeller Foundation, and is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. Wolfensohns father, Hyman, was employed by James Armand de Rothschild of the Rothschild banking dynasty, after whom James was named. His father taught him how to cultivate mentors, friends and contacts of influence. Wolfensohn rose quickly through the financial world, and as his father had lived in service to the Rothschilds the dominant family of the 19th century James Wolfensohn lived in service to the Rockefellers, arguably the dominant family of the 20th century. On the event of David Rockefellers 90th birthday, James Wolfensohn, speaking at the Council on Foreign Relations, stated:
[T]he person who had perhaps the greatest influence on my life professionally in this country, and Im very happy to say personally there afterwards, is David Rockefeller, who first met me at the Harvard Business School in 1957 or 58… [At the beginning of the 20th century] as we looked at the world, a family, the Rockefeller family, decided that the issues were not just national for the United States, were not just related to the rich countries. And where, extraordinarily and amazingly, Davids grandfather set up the Rockefeller Foundation, the purpose of which was to take a global view.
… So the Rockefeller family, in this last 100 years, has contributed in a way that is quite extraordinary to the development in that period and has given ample focus to the issues of development with which I have been associated. In fact, its fair to say that there has been no other single family influence greater than the Rockefellers in the whole issue of globalization and in the whole issue of addressing the questions which, in some ways, are still before us today. And for that David, were deeply grateful to you and for your own contribution in carrying these forward in the way that you did.
David Rockefeller has been even less humble (but perhaps more honest) in his assertion of his familys and his own personal role in shaping the world. In his 2002 book, Memoirs, David Rockefeller wrote:
For more than a century ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents such as my encounter with Castro to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure one world, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.
As if this admission was not quite enough, at a 1991 meeting of the Bilderberg group, David Rockefeller was quoted as saying:
We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost 40 years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But the world is more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries.
So, happy 96th birthday, Mr. David Rockefeller! But I am sorry to say (or perhaps not so sorry) that while the mainstream media have respected their promises of discretion, the new media the alternative media have not. As you said yourself, It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years, it seems that the lights of publicity are now descending upon your plan for the world, making it all the more difficult to come to pass. Indeed, the world is more sophisticated, but not because the world is ready for your plan, but because the world is getting ready to reject it. While national sovereignty certainly has problems and is hardly something I would consider ideal, the supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is about the worst scenario one could imagine. So as a birthday present to you, Mr. Rockefeller, I promise (and I am sure that I am speaking for a great many more than simply myself) that I will continue to expose your plans for the world, so that your dream and our nightmare will never become a reality. The light will shine, and in due time, the people will be ready to follow its path.
Andrew Gavin Marshall is a Research Associate with the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG). e is co-editor, with Michel Chossudovsky, of the recent book, The Global Economic Crisis: The Great Depression of the XXI Century. He is currently writing a book on "Global Government" due to be released in 2011 by Global Research Publishers.