There are two common misconceptions held by those who are critical of globalism.

The first error is that there is a very small group of people who secretly run the world with all-powerful and unrestrained dictatorial powers. The second error is that there is a large amorphous and secret organization that runs the world. In both cases, the use of the word "they" becomes the culprit for all our troubles, whoever "they" might be. If taxes go up, it is "they" that did it. If the stock market goes down, "they" are to blame. Of course, nobody really knows who "they" are so a few figureheads (people or organizations) are often made out to be the scapegoats.

Depending on a person's politics and philosophy, the scapegoats could be the U.S. President, the ACLU, the Ford Foundation, or Vladimir Putin. The point is, the real power structure is not correctly defined, and thus escapes exposure.

These misconceptions are understandable because when things are wrong, we all have a driving need to know who to blame! In some cases, elitist slight-of-hand initiates and then perpetuates false assumptions.

This writer has never been accused of charging that all large corporations are guilty of initiating and perpetuating globalization. There are many businesses, including banks, who are led by moral, ethical and goodhearted businessmen or businesswomen. Just because a company might touch globalism does not mean it and its management or employees are evil.

Every bit of thirty-five years of research indicates that there is a relatively small yet diverse group of global players who have been the planners and instigators behind globalization for many decades. The primary driving force that moves this "clique" is greed; the secondary force is the lust for power. In the case of the academics who are key to globalism, a third force is professional recognition and acceptance (a subtle form of egoism and power.)

It is also important to understand that core globalists have full understanding of their goals, plans and actions. They are not dimwitted, ignorant, misinformed or naive.

The global elite march in three essential columns: Corporate, Political and Academic. For the sake of clarity, these names will be used herein to refer to these three groups.

In general, the goals for globalism are created by Corporate. Academic then provides studies and white papers that justify Corporate goals. Political sells Academic's arguments to the public and if necessary, changes laws to accommodate and facilitate Corporate in getting what it wants.

An important ancillary player in globalism is the media, which we will call Press in this report. Press is necessary to filter Corporate, Academic and Political communications to the public. Press is not a fourth column, however, because it's purpose is merely reflective. However, we will see that Press is dominated by members of Corporate, Political and Academic who sit on the various boards of directors of major Press organizations.

This report will attempt to identify and label the core players in the globalization process. The intent is to show the makeup and pattern of the core, not to list every person in it. Nevertheless, many people will be named and their associations and connections revealed. This is done for two reasons.

First, it will equip the reader be able to accurately identify other core players as they are brought into focus. Secondly, the reader will be able to pass over minor players who may sound like "big fish" but in fact are only pedestrians.

The old saying, "Birds of a feather, flock together" is appropriate for the perpetrators of globalism. Sociologically speaking, they are like any other people group with like interests: they naturally tend to form societies that will help them achieve their common interests. A side-benefit of fellowship is mutual support and encouragement. Once formed, such groups tend to be self-perpetuating, at least as long as common interests remain.

In modern history, the pinnacle of global drivers has been the Trilateral Commission. Founded in 1973 by David Rockefeller and Zbigniew Brzezinski, this group is credited with being the founder of the New International Economic Order that has given rise to the globalization we see today.

Prior to the founding of the Trilateral Commission, the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) was the most significant body of global-minded elitists in the United States. As far back as 1959, the CFR was explicit about a need for world government:

"The U.S. must strive to build a new international order... including states labeling themselves as 'socialist'... to maintain and gradually increase the authority of the United Nations."

The site for the United Nations headquarters in New York was originally donated by the Rockefeller family, and the CFR world architects worked for many years to use the U.N. as a means to develop an image of world order. Indeed, the CFR membership roster has been, and still is a Who's Who of the elitist eastern establishment.

The first problem with the CFR is that it became too large and too diverse to act as a "cutting edge" in global policy creation. The second problem is that it's membership was limited to north America: What group could effect global changes without a global membership?

The CFR continues to be significant in the sense that politicians often look to its membership when searching for people to fill various appointments in government. It also continues to be a policy mill through its official organ, Foreign Affairs.

While there are a several core global elitists in the ranks of the CFR, they represent a very small percentage of the total membership. Conversely, there are many CFR members who are only lightly involved with globalism. For this reason, we do not count the CFR as being central to globalization today.

David Rockefeller recognized the shortcomings of the CFR when he founded the Trilateral Commission in 1973 with Zbigniew Brzezinski. Rockefeller represented Corporate and Brzezinski represented Academic.

Together, they chose approximately 300 members from north America, Europe and Japan, whom they viewed as being their "birds of a feather." These members were at the pinnacle of their profession, whether Corporate, Academic, Political or Press. It is a testimony to the influence of Rockefeller and Brzezinski that they could get this many people to say "Yes" when they were tapped for membership.

Out of the 54 original U.S. members of the Trilateral Commission, Jimmy Carter was fronted to win the presidential election in 1976. Once inaugurated, Carter brought no less than 18 fellow members of the Commission into top-level cabinet and government agencies.

Perhaps no one has described the Trilateral operation as succinctly as veteran reporter Jeremiah Novak in the Christian Science Monitor (February 7, 1977):

"Today a new crop of economists, working in an organization known as the Trilateral Commission, is on the verge of creating a new international economic system, one designed by men as brilliant as Keynes and White. Their names are not well known, but these modern thinkers are as important to our age as Keynes and White were to theirs.

"Moreover, these economists, like their World War II counterparts, are working closely with high government officials, in this case President Jimmy Carter and Vice President Walter Mondale. And what is now being discussed at the highest levels of government, in both the United States and abroad, is the creation of a new world economic system - a system that will affect jobs in America and elsewhere, the prices consumers pay, and the freedom of individuals, corporations, and nations to enter into a truly planetary economic system. Indeed, many observers see the advent of the Carter administration and what is now being called the "Trilateral" cabinet as the harbinger of this new era."¹

The pernicious influence of the Commission and its dominance of the U.S. Executive branch remains unchallenged to this day.

Ronald Reagan was not a member of the Trilateral Commission, but his Vice President, George H. W. Bush, was a member. The Commission's influence was safely perpetuated into the Reagan years.

The 1988 election of George H.W. Bush to the presidency further consolidated Trilateral influence in the U.S.

In 1992, Trilateral member William Jefferson Clinton followed in the presidency and contributed greatly to the cause of globalization.

In 2000, George W. Bush assumed the presidency. While it can be demonstrated that Bush is closely aligned with and totally dedicated to Trilateral goals, he is not a member of the Commission. However, Vice President Dick Cheney is a member of the Commission.

Obviously, Corporate's partnerships with Political, Academic and Press has been very successful.

* Indicates member of Executive Committee

Rockefeller and Brzezinski's strategy was nefarious, yet brilliant.

The election of democrat James Earl "I will never lie to you" Carter was assured by delivering the mostly democratic labor vote. This was accomplished by adding to the inner core: Leonard Woodcock (UAW), I.W. Abel (United Steelworkers) and Lane Kirkland (AFL-CIO).

By 1977, three more labor leaders were added to the membership: Glenn E. Watts (Communications Workers of America), Martin J. Ward (president of United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices), and Sol Chaikin, president of the International Ladies Garment Workers Union.

Leonard Woodcock served as Chief Envoy to China under Carter, and was largely responsible for solidifying economic and political ties with Communist China. [Editor's note: Any reader who is or was a member of one of these unions will instantly have flashes of insight as to the enduring duplicity of labor management -- you were effectively "sold down the river" starting 1973 and continuing into the present.]

Those commissioners who Carter brought into his administration (the initial "steering committee", if you will) were Walter Mondale (Vice President), Zbigniew Brzezinski (National Security Advisor), Cyrus Vance (Secretary of State), Harold Brown (Secretary of Defense) and W. Michael Blumenthal (Secretary of the Treasury,) among others.

As the Washington Post phrased it:

"Trilateralisms are not three-sided people. They are members of a private, though not secret, international organization put together by the wealthy banker, David Rockefeller, to stimulate the establishment dialogue between Western Europe, Japan and the United States.

"But here is the unsettling thing about the Trilateral Commission. The President-elect is a member. So is Vice-President-elect Walter F. Mondale. So are the new Secretaries of State, Defense and Treasury, Cyrus R. Vance, Harold Brown and W. Michael Blumenthal. So is Zbigniew Brzezinski, who is a former Trilateral director, and, Carter's national security advisor, also a bunch of others who will make foreign policy for America in the next four years."³

Before Carter's term was completed, no less than 18 members (thirty percent of the U.S. Commission membership) of the Trilateral Commission served in his administration. Coincidence? Hardly!

This article purposely leaves out discussion of the non-U.S. Membership of the Commission membership, which will be saved for another day. Suffice it to say that the European and Japanese contingents were just as powerful and effective in their respective home countries. Approximately one-third of the membership came from Europe and the other third from Japan. The joint membership met annually (no press allowed) to formulate policy and action plans for their respective regions. Many, if not most, of their policies were published in the Commission's quarterly journal, Trialogue.

The most damning argument ever launched against the Trilateral Commission is the unconstitutional influence of other governments and forces upon the U.S. For instance, Commission members are not elected nor representative of the general population of the U.S., yet they effectively dominated the Executive Branch of the U.S. government. When the Commission resolved policies (behind closed-doors) with non-U.S. members, who were a mere one-third minority, could it be said that foreign influences effectively controlled U.S. policy?

These concerns were never addressed by Congress or the Judiciary. The Executive branch would have nothing to address because it has been continuously dominated by Commission members -- who repeatedly assured us that there was no such conflict of interest. Of course, the answer to these questions are self-evident: U.S. interests, economic and political, have been subverted.

The economic subversion of the U.S. was studied in The August Review's For Sale: The United States of America and was likened to the plundering of a nation, the likes of which have not been seen in modern history.

The following list of north American members is not exhaustive. These are selected because of their high visibility in positions within Corporate, Political or Economic and Press. A future installment of The August Review will examine the entire membership list more carefully and completely. The purpose here is to show that the Trilateral Commission has grown, rather than declined, in strength over the years.

Keep in mind that there is no enrollment or application process to belong to the Trilateral Commission. One is invited to join in a manner similar to a college student being "tapped" for membership in a fraternity. Thus, the process is highly selective and discrete. Candidates are thoroughly screened before invitation is delivered. For this reason, one can be relatively sure that anyone who is or who has ever been a member of the Commission is in the core of the global elite. There are likely a few members who are not truly a part of the core, but for the sake of aggregate analysis, this is not an important issue.

* Indicates member of Executive Committee

The occupational makeup of the Trilateral Commission has obviously changed over time, but that only represents the maturing of the globalization process. What was needed in 1973 is not what is needed today. Still, there are some consistencies that are easily observed.

The most obvious consistency (and expansion) is the very large representation by the banking cartel: two chairmen and two board members of of the Federal Reserve System, two presidents of the World Bank, director of the International Monetary Fund, and chairmen/CEO's of several prominent global banks. This does not take into account any linkages from Commission members who are also directors of commercial and investment banks. Financial representation is not incidental because money is the lifeblood of globalism. The August Review's coverage in Global Banking: The Bank for International Settlements detailed the apex and makeup of global banking.

Through membership, the Trilateral Commission dominates the executive branch of the U.S. government, the Federal Reserve System, and is closely aligned with the Bank for International Settlements, which controls the world's currencies and money supply. This is seen even without analyzing the remaining two-thirds of Commission membership that resides outside of the U.S.

The IIE is an example of a key organization in which one might identify other core members of the global elite. Founded in 1981, IIE is a small policy-wonk organization with only 60 employees and an annual budget of $7 million. According to its own web site,

"The Institute for International Economics is a private, nonprofit, nonpartisan research institution devoted to the study of international economic policy. Since 1981 the Institute has provided timely, objective analysis and concrete solutions to key international economic problems.

"The Institute attempts to anticipate emerging issues and to be ready with practical ideas to inform and shape public debate. Its audience includes government officials and legislators, business and labor leaders, management and staff at international organizations, university-based scholars and their students, other research institutions and nongovernmental organizations, the media, and the public at large. It addresses these groups both in the United States and around the world."⁵

This would be easily overlooked unless you examine IIE's board of directors. Trilateralist Peter G. Peterson is chairman of the board. Anthony M. Solomon is honorary chairman of the executive committee. Solomon is the former chairman of Warburg (USA) Inc., former president and CEO of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and former Under Secretary of the Treasury for Monetary Affairs. Solomon was listed only as "Consultant" on the 1973 Commission membership list.⁶

There are 12 other Trilateral Commission members (including David Rockefeller) on IIE's board of directors! Having established Trilateral influence (if not total domination), consider the following non-Commission IIE board members who might well be candidates for inclusion in the core of the global elite:

• Chen Yuan - Governor, China Development Bank; former Deputy Governor, Peoples Bank of China.
• Jacob A. Frenkel - Former governor of the Bank of Israel and former IMF economic counselor and director of research.
• Maurice R. Greenberg - Chairman, American International Group.
• David O'Reilly - Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, ChevronTexaco Corporation.
• James W. Owens - Chairman and CEO of Caterpillar.
• Lawrence H. Summers - President, Harvard University; former Secretary of the Treasury.

These are just a few of the non-Trilateral board members, and are reviewed only to show the process by which one might identify additional global elite core members.

There are other organizations like IIE that could stand similar analysis of purpose, leadership and directorship.

As was declared in the beginning of this analysis, the stampede to globalism is conducted by a small group of individuals with aspirations for global dominance. It should be noted again that there are members of the global "core" who are not members of the Trilateral Commission.

In general, they are driven by lust for money and power. They have clearly made an end-run around the American people in order to achieve personal goals that, in many cases, are diametrically opposed to U.S. interests. If the American people fully understood the magnitude of the deception and power-grab, they would immediately and totally repudiate these individuals and their self-serving global schemes.

In 1971, Zbigniew Brzezinski wrote in Between Two Ages: The Technetronic Era,

"...the nation-state as a fundamental unit of man's organized life has ceased to be the principal creative force: International banks and multinational corporations are acting and planning in terms that are far in advance of the political concepts of the nation-state."⁷

Brzezinski could not have been more clear than this. Of the few people who paid attention to Brzezinski previously, only one person needed to receive his message fully: David Rockefeller, chairman of Chase Manhattan Bank and consummate globalist. When they teamed up to start the Trilateral Commission in 1973, the rest, as we say, "became history."

So, how can one determine if an individual is a member of the core of the global elite? There is a good chance that such a person will be:

• closely aligned with and accepted by many of the people already identified as core;
• often family-related to other core members (i.e., the Bush family, Rockefeller family, etc.);
• part of the "revolving-door" that switches them in and out of important and critical positions in government, academia and business;
• a member (director or high-level executive) of an organization identified as a core company, such as J.P. Morgan Chase, Citigroup, Caterpillar Tractor, etc.;
• educated at a prestigious and global-minded university;
• belong to one or more organizations that are dominated by people already identified as core.

This list is not comprehensive, nor is it meant to be some simplistic litmus test. It is important to realize that many names being bandied about are NOT part of the core of the global elite, but rather become decoys that shift the focus away from the real elite core. Discretion, common sense and study is required to understand the difference between the two.

Footnotes 

1. Novak, Jeremiah, Christian Science Monitor (February 7, 1977)
2. The Trilateral Commission, Membership List, www.trilateral.org
3. Washington Post, January 16, 1977
4. op. cit.
5. About Us, http://www.iie.com/institute/aboutiie.cfm
6. Board of Directors, http://www.iie.com/institute/board.cfm
7. Brzezinski, Zbigniew, Between Two Ages: The Technetronic Era, (Penguin Books , 1971)