Hegelian domination of Skull and Bones, secret establishment and J.P. Morgan wars

Right and Left -- A Control Device

For Hegelians, the State is almighty, and seen as "the march of God on earth." Indeed, a State religion. Progress in the Hegelian State is through contrived conflict: the clash of opposites makes for progress. If you can control the opposites, you dominate the nature of the outcome. We trace the extraordinary Skull and Bones influence in a major Hegelian conflict: Naziism vs. Communism. Skull and Bones members were in the dominant decisionmaking positions -- Bush, Harriman, Stimson, Lovett, and so on -- all Bonesmen, and instrumental in guiding the conflict through use of "right" and "left." They financed and encouraged the growths of both philosophies and controlled the outcome to a significant extent. This was aided by the "reductionist" division in science, the opposite of historical "wholeness." By dividing science and learning into narrower and narrower segments, it became easier to control the whole through the parts. In education, the Dewey system was initiated and promoted by Skull and Bones members. Dewey was an ardent statist, and a believer in the Hegelian idea that the child exists to be trained to serve the State. This requires suppression of individualist tendencies and a careful spoon-feeding of approved knowledge.

This "dumbing down" of American education is not easily apparent unless you have studied in both foreign and domestic U.S. universities -- then the contrast becomes crystal clear. This dumbing down is now receiving attention. Two excellent books are The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America, by Charlotte Thomson Iserbyt (Conscience Press, Revenna Ohio, 2001), and The Dumbing Down of America, by John Taylor Gotta. Both books trace this process to the impact of education, and both give remarkable detail of the process. We go further, in that we trace the import of the system to three Yalies members of Skull & Bones. For Iserbyt, in The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America, the American education system begins with Rockefeller and Gates. But in fact, this statist system is a reflection of the Hegelian ideas brought to the United States by the Skull and Bones "troika" of Gilman, White and Dwight, and then financed by Rockefeller.

People Control

Today in California, one can see in real time the use of controlled conflict to achieve a desired outcome. The debate over the energy crisis is carefully contained to a debate over price caps and price control. Republicans want no caps and no controls. Most Democrats want price controls through caps. But look at what is NOT discussed anywhere. The entire spectrum of almost free energy, based on a decade of research is carefully kept out of the discussion. Isn't this highly relevant to an energy crisis? In fact, the existence of free energy systems just down the road is the reason for the controlled debate. Mills Blacklight Power now has its patents and some utilities have already bought in. Bearden's MEG energy from space, is under discussion. Working models exist.

The maligned cold fusion has hundreds of successful experiments, but so far as we know, cannot be repeated with sufficient assurance. Other systems have come into the view of government agencies, and then disappear from sight. A knowing public would ask, Why are these not included in the discussion?" -- Simple. Because the utilities know they are for real, and only a few years down the road. The problem for utilities is not the price of energy today, but how to dump their fixed assets (hydro plants, transmission lines, etc.) onto the public. These "valuable" assets will have zero value down the road, because all new systems are stand-alone units which don't need fixed plant and transmission lines. If the public is aware of the dilemma of the utilities, the ability to dump assets onto the State is heavily reduced. The Republican-Democrat debate over "caps" is a diversion. The relevant question carefully avoided is, how long will it take to get these new systems into production? Another example is Monsanto Corporation development of genetic engineering and predator seed, a barely-concealed effort for world domination of agriculture. President George Bush, Jr. , a Bonesman, appoints a Monsanto vice president, Dr. Virginia Weldon, as Director of Food and Drug Administration, which has the power to block labeling of genetically-engineered foods, and pass on other corporate control efforts. Just before this, in New Technology, we had the 1989 dramatic announcement of "cold fusion." When this announcement was made public, President

George Bush (also a Bonesman) called establishment scientist the late physicist Seagrum into his office and gave

instructions. We don't know what was said, but we know what happened. Cold fusion, a valid process for free energy, as was subsequently revealed, was slandered and harassed by the establishment, no doubt fearful of what free energy would do to the oil industry.

The dialectical process did not originate with Marx as Marxists claim, but with Fichte and Hegel in late 18th and early 19th century Germany. In the dialectical process a clash of opposites brings about a synthesis. For example, a clash of political left and political right brings about another political system, a synthesis of the two, neither left nor right. This conflict of opposites is essential to bring about change. Today this process can be identified in the literature of the Trilateral Commission where "change" is promoted and "conflict management" is termed the means to bring about this change.

In the Hegelian system conflict is essential. Furthermore, for Hegel and systems based on Hegel, the State is absolute. The State requires complete obedience from the individual citizen. An individual does not exist for himself in these so-called organic systems but only to perform a role in the operation of the State. He finds freedom only in obedience to the State. There was no freedom in Hitler's Germany, there is no freedom for the individual under Marxism, neither will there be in the New World Order. And if it sounds like George Orwell's 1984 -- it is.

In brief, the State is supreme and conflict is used to bring about the ideal society. Individuals find freedom in obedience to the rulers.

The British secret society, known as "The Group" or just plain "US", was founded at Oxford University, much as The Order was founded at Yale, but without the Masonic mumbo jumbo. As we noted in Memorandum Five, the Group operates in a series of concentric circles and like The Order consists of old line families allied with private merchant bankers, known in the U.S. as investment bankers.

Bearing in mind the proven existence of The Group, the operations of The Order and the kind of penetration it has achieved cannot be explained by mere chance. By examining The Order's operations we can generate a picture of its objectives without access to any internal constitution or statement of objectives even if such exists. It may only be word of mouth.

By contrast, The Group's objective is recorded in Cecil Rhodes' will. It was:

The extension of British rule throughout the world, the perfecting of a system of emigration from the United Kingdom and of colonization by British subjects of all lands wherein the means of livelihood are attainable by energy, labor and enterprise ... and the ultimate recovery of the United States of America as an integral part of the British Empire.

This objective is, of course, ridiculous and somewhat immature, but no less ridiculous and immature than the New World Order objective of The Order. Yet The Group has controlled British policy for a hundred years and still does.

Both The Group and The Order have been created by Anglophiles who want to pattern the world on a Hegelian-Anglo hybrid culture. Where the Latins, the Slavs and the Sino races fit is not considered, but clearly these cultures will be disinclined to become pawns of either the British Empire or New England Yankees. Even within the Commonwealth, a voluntary association of nations, it is unlikely that Canada, Australia and New Zealand would accept the constitutional bondage envisaged by Cecil Rhodes. Both secret organizations overlook, and there is a philosophic basis for this neglect, the natural right of any ethnic group, be it white, black or yellow, English, Slavic or Latin, to develop its own culture without coercion.

Historically, operations of The Order have concentrated on society, how to change society in a specific manner towards a specific goal: a New World Order. We know the elements in society that will have to be changed in order to bring about this New World order, we can then examine The Order's actions in this context. More or less these elements would have to be:

• Education -- how the population of the future will behave;
• Money -- the means of holding wealth and exchanging goods;
• Law -- the authority to enforce the will of the state, a world law and a world court is needed for a world state;
• Politics -- the direction of the State;
• Economy -- the creation of wealth;
• History -- what people believe happened in the past;
• Psychology -- the means of controlling how people think;
• Philanthropy -- so that people think well of the controllers;
• Medicine -- the power over health, life and death;
• Religion -- people's spiritual beliefs, the spur to action for many;
• Media -- what people know and learn about current events;
• Continuity -- the power to appoint who follows in your footsteps.

HOW THE ORDER CREATES WAR AND REVOLUTION

The operational history of The Order can only be understood within a framework of the Hegelian dialectic process. Quite simply this is the notion that conflict creates history.

From this axiom it follows that controlled conflict can create a predetermined history. For example: When the Trilateral Commission discusses "managed conflict", as it does extensively in its literature, the Commission implies the managed use of conflict for long run predetermined ends -- not for the mere random exercise of manipulative control to solve a problem.

The dialectic takes this Trilateral "managed conflict" process one step further. In Hegelian terms, an existing force (the thesis) generates a counterforce (the antithesis). Conflict between the two forces results in the forming of a synthesis. Then the process starts all over again: Thesis vs. antithesis results in synthesis.

The synthesis sought by the Establishment is called the New World Order. Without controlled conflict this New World Order will not come about. Random individual actions of persons in society would not lead to this synthesis, it's artificial, therefore it has to be created. And this is being done with the calculated, managed, use of conflict. And all the while this synthesis is being sought, there is profit in playing the involved parties against one another. This explains why the International bankers backed the Nazis, the Soviet Union, North Korea, North Vietnam, ad nauseum, against the United States. The "conflict" built profits while pushing the world ever closer to One World Government. The process continues today. 

In Hegelian philosophy the conflict of political "right" and political "left," or thesis and antithesis in Hegelian terms, is essential to the forward movement of history and historical change itself. Conflict between thesis and antithesis brings about a synthesis, i.e., a new historical situation.

Our descriptive world history in the West and Marxist countries consists only of description and analysis within a political framework of "right" or "left." For example, historical work published in the West looks at communism and socialism either through the eyes of financial capitalism or Marxism. Historical work published in the Soviet Union looks at the West only through Marxist eyes. However, there is another frame for historical analysis that has never (so far as we can determine) been utilized, i.e., to use a framework of Hegelian logic, to determine if those elites who control the State use the dialectic process to create a predetermined historical synthesis.

Only tantalizing glimpses of any such creative process can be found in modern historical works. The most convincing glimpses are in the late Carroll Quigley's Tragedy And Hope which we shall quote below. Rarely some politicians on the periphery of elitist power have allowed brief insights into the public eye. For example, President Woodrow Wilson made the revealing statement: "Some of the biggest men in the U.S. in the fields of commerce and manufacturing know that there is a power so organized, so subtle, so complete, so pervasive that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it." 

From the Hegelian system of political thought, alien to most of us in the West, stem such absurdities as the State seen as the "march of God through history," that the State is also God, that the only duty of a citizen is to serve God by serving the State, that the State is Absolute Reason, that a citizen can only find freedom by worship and utter obedience to the State. However, we also noted in How The Order Controls Education that Hegelian absurdities have thoroughly penetrated the U.S. educational system under pressure from such organizations as the National Education Association and major foundations.

From this system of Hegelian philosophy comes the historical dialectic, i.e., that all historical events emerge from a conflict between opposing forces. These emerging events are above and different from the conflicting events. Any idea or implementation of an idea may be seen as THESIS. This thesis will encourage emergence of opposing forces, known as ANTITHESIS. The final outcome will be neither thesis nor antithesis, but a synthesis of the two forces in conflict.

Karl Marx, in Das Kapital, posed capitalism as thesis and communism as antithesis. What has been completely ignored by historians, including Marxists, is that any clash between these forces cannot lead to a society which is either capitalist or communist but must lead to a society characterized by a synthesis of the two conflicting forces. The clash of opposites must in the Hegelian system bring about a society neither capitalist nor communist. Moreover, in the Hegelian scheme of events, this new synthesis will reflect the concept of the State as God and the individual as totally subordinate to an all powerful State. 

The concept of the Hegelian dialectic is obviously beyond the comprehension of modern textbook writers. No historical or political theory textbook that we know of discusses the possible use of the Hegelian dialectic in American politics. Yet its use has been recorded by Professor Carroll Quigley in Tragedy And Hope, a trade book based on documents of the Council on Foreign Relations. Quigley not only describes banker J.P. Morgan's use of the "right" and the "left" as competitive devices for political manipulation of society, but adds an eye-opening comment:

"Unfortunately we do not have space here for this great and untold story, but it must be remembered that what we do say is part of a much larger picture." (Tragedy And Hope, p. 945)

This much larger picture is partly revealed in this book. First let's briefly note how J.P. Morgan used the dialectic process as a means of political control for financial ends. The only college attended by Morgan was 2-3 years in the mid-1850s at University of Gottingen, Germany, which was a center of Hegelian activism. We have no record that Morgan joined any secret society, no more than the KONKNEIPANTEN, one of the student corps. Yet German Hegelianism is apparent in J.P. Morgan's approach to political parties -- Morgan used them all.

Quigley did not know of the link between the Morgan firm, other New York financial interests and The Order. As we have noted before, Quigley did publish a valuable expose of the British Establishment known as "The Group." And we know from personal correspondence that Quigley suspected more than he published, but identification of an American elite was not part of Quigley's work. The names Harriman, Bush, Acheson, Whitney -- even Stimson -- do not appear in The Anglo American Establishment. 

This practice by The Order of supporting both "right" and "left" persists down to the present day. We find in 1984, for example, that Averell Harriman (The Order '13) is elder statesman of the Democratic Party while George Bush (The Order '49) is a Republican Vice President and leader of the misnamed "moderate" (actually extremist) wing of the Republican Party. In the center we have so-called "independent" John Anderson, who in fact receives heavy financial support from the elite. 

Western textbooks also have gigantic gaps. For example, after World War II the Tribunals set up to investigate Nazi war criminals were careful to censor any materials recording Western assistance to Hitler. By the same token, Western textbooks on Soviet economic development omit any description of the economic and financial aid given to the 1917 Revolution and subsequent economic development by Western firms and banks.

Revolution is always recorded as a spontaneous event by the politically or economically deprived against an autocratic state. Never in Western textbooks will you find the evidence that revolutions need finance and the source of the finance in many cases traces back to Wall Street. 

Text taken from: AMERICA'S SECRET ESTABLISHMENT: AN INTRODUCTION TO THE ORDER OF SKULL AND BONES by Antony C. Sutton