For those who don't have time to read the whole book, I'm going to hit the extreme highlights, which is hard to do because the claims made are so incredible and run counter to everything you've been taught, I have this overwhelming need to document everything I say. But suffice to say, the documentation can be found in the book itself so you know I'm not blowing this stuff out of proportion.
To start off with, we have a lot of confustion today about labels: Is a communist the opposite of a fascist? Are socialists different than communists and so on. Dr. Sutton explains the confusion away in the very first chapter:
On the other hand, it may be observed that both the extreme right and the extreme left of the conventional political spectrum are absolutely collectivist. The national socialist (for example, the fascist) and the international socialist (for example, the Communist) both recommend totalitarian politico-economic systems based on naked, unfettered political power and individual coercion. Both systems require monopoly control of society. While monopoly control of industries was once the objective of J. P. Morgan and J. D. Rockefeller, by the late nineteenth century the inner sanctums of Wall Street understood that the most efficient way to gain an unchallenged monopoly was to "go political" and make society go to work for the monopolists — under the name of the public good and the public interest. This strategy was detailed in 1906 by Frederick C. Howe in his Confessions of a Monopolist.
Consequently, one barrier to mature understanding of recent history is the notion that all capitalists are the bitter and unswerving enemies of all Marxists and socialists. This erroneous idea originated with Karl Marx and was undoubtedly useful to his purposes. In fact, the idea is nonsense. There has been a continuing, albeit concealed, alliance between international political capitalists and international revolutionary socialists — to their mutual benefit. This alliance has gone unobserved largely because historians — with a few notable exceptions — have an unconscious Marxian bias and are thus locked into the impossibility of any such alliance existing. The open-minded reader should bear two clues in mind: monopoly capitalists are the bitter enemies of laissez-faire entrepreneurs; and, given the weaknesses of socialist central planning, the totalitarian socialist state is a perfect captive market for monopoly capitalists, if an alliance can be made with the socialist powerbrokers. Suppose — and it is only hypothesis at this point — that American monopoly capitalists were able to reduce a planned socialist Russia to the status of a captive technical colony? Would not this be the logical twentieth-century internationalist extension of the Morgan railroad monopolies and the Rockefeller petroleum trust of the late nineteenth century?
Getting back to our time period, we find Leon Trotsky living it up in New York City despite not having a regular job. He has a chaffeur, a furnished apartment complete with the modern conveniences, including a refrigerator. Not bad for 1917. He leaves for Russia with ten large on him through Halifax. He was detained there as that sent up some red flags, but was cleared to go through some out of the ordinary hoop-jumping. When investiaging government, one must always be on the lookout for changes in "standard operating procedures". As the historian Jennings C. Wise said:
"Historians must never forget that Woodrow Wilson, despite the efforts of the British police, made it possible for Leon Trotsky to enter Russia with an American passport."Now the the $10,000 Trotsky had was strongly suspected to be German money as they thought a revolution in Russia would be to their benefit. Who knew that Wall Street banksters would also view a shake up in Russia to their benefit? They could just move in and the whole continent of Asia would be like putty in their hands. Let the propaganda war begin:
As early as November 28, 1917, Colonel House cabled President Woodrow Wilson from Paris that it was "exceedingly important" that U.S. newspaper comments advocating that "Russia should be treated as an enemy" be "suppressed." Then next month William Franklin Sands, executive secretary of the Morgan-controlled American International Corporation and a friend of the previously mentioned Basil Miles, submitted a memorandum that described Lenin and Trotsky as appealing to the masses and that urged the U.S. to recognize Russia. Even American socialist Walling complained to the Department of State about the pro-Soviet attitude of George Creel (of the U.S. Committee on Public Information), Herbert Swope, and William Boyce Thompson (of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York).
Even the Russian newspapers saw the hypocrisy:
Why are they so interested in enlightenment? Why was the money given the socialist revolutionaries and not to the constitutional democrats? One would suppose the latter nearer and dearer to hearts of bankers.
So the banksters found socialist revolutionaries more easily controlled and suitable for their plans of a continent-wide monopoly.
Prior to 1917, we learn that the banksters have been funding little revolutions all of the world. Think of it as a way to bulldoze a junked up lot so you can build up what you want. From the 1910 Panama uprising to China in 1912 to paying Pancho Villa and funding the first communist government ever in Mexico, our buddies the collectivizing banksters are on the move.
My dear Colonel House:Just before I left New York last Monday, I was told convincingly that "Wall Street" had completed arrangements for one more raid of Mexican bandits into the United States: to be so timed and so atrocious that it would settle the election ....
Up until 1914, the US had been like Switzerland, neutral in all things concerning the Old World. But now there was money to be made, so screw that! We find banksters funding Britain and France using the State Department as a cheap secretary. There is a reason that a lot of this was classified for 50 years, it looks really, really bad.
The banksters put their boots on the ground by posing as "aid workers". Classic, right? Under the auspices of the Red Cross and with big corporate funding, they begin printing and distributing communist propaganda, setting up the Russian Liberty Loan, engaging a staff of lecturers to spread the virtues of a state-controlled society complete with cinematograph illustrations. Cutting edge, cool, huh? The Chairman of the New York Fed gives the Bolsheviks a cool million to get up and running:
Isn't that how it always is? The banksters make rules for everyone but themselves. That's how they maintain control, proles.Hermann Hagedorn's biography The Magnate: William Boyce Thompson and His Time (1869-1930) reproduces a photograph of a cablegram from J.P. Morgan in New York to W. B. Thompson, "Care American Red Cross, Hotel Europe, Petrograd." The cable is date-stamped, showing it was received at Petrograd "8-Dek 1917" (8 December 1917), and reads:New York Y757/5 24W5 Nil — Your cable second received. We have paid National City Bank one million dollars as instructed — Morgan.The National City Bank branch in Petrograd had been exempted from the Bolshevik nationalization decree — the only foreign or domestic Russian bank to have been so exempted. Hagedorn says that this million dollars paid into Thompson's NCB account was used for "political purposes."
Thompson then left Russia with his bud, Thomas Lamont to do a little lobbying in old jolly England:
Lamont journeyed to London and met with Thompson, who had left Petrograd on December 5, traveled via Bergen, Norway, and arrived in London on December 10. The most important achievement of Thompson and Lamont in London was to convince the British War Cabinet — then decidedly anti-Bolshevik — that the Bolshevik regime had come to stay, and that British policy should cease to be anti-Bolshevik, should accept the new realities, and should support Lenin and Trotsky. Thompson and Lamont left London on December 18 and arrived in New York on December 25, 1917. They attempted the same process of conversion in the United States.I won't get into it, but the private central banking and the political machine in Great Britain is a whole other ball of wax. But one person you ought to meet is Sir Basil Zaharoff, the world's largest munitions dealer at the time. In fact,
On more than one occasion, reports (Donald) McCormick, Woodrow Wilson, Lloyd George, and Georges Clemenceau met in Zaharoff's Paris home. McCormick notes that "Allied statesmen and leaders were obliged to consult him before planning any great attack." British intelligence, according to McCormick, "discovered documents which incriminated servants of the Crown as secret agents of Sir Basil Zaharoff with the knowledge of Lloyd George." In 1917 Zaharoff was linked to the Bolsheviks; he sought to divert munitions away from anti-Bolsheviks and had already intervened in behalf of the Bolshevik regime in both London and Paris.So the Commies had help not only from the richest source of money in the world, Wall Street, but also the biggest arms dealer in the world. It didn't just happen as your textbooks would lead you to believe.Woodrow Wilson expressed his support of the Bolsheviks at about this time which absolutely befuddled those poor old-line diplomats still in Russia who didn't have a clue about all this backwater wheeling and dealing. The diplomat in Switzerland sent this telegram to the State Dept:
Disgusted with the Wilson support of the Bolsheviks, De Witt C. Poole, the head of the official US delegation to Russia resigned. The State Dept was real shook up and played, the "your resignation might put American troops in harms way" card to try to keep him in line.
For Polk. President's message to Consul Moscow not understood here and people are asking why the President expresses support of Bolsheviki, in view of raping, murder and anarchy of these bands.
A communist propaganda program was then instituted by the banksters to see if they could get this nation-wide monopoly plan to spread. They set up the Soviet Bureau in New York to get the communist ideas going in America. They didn't need a majority to be "true believers" of this craziness, just enough for them to manipulate and place in key positions. Oh, if they could see us now, huh?
We find that the address 120 Broadway, NYC is a significant beehive of activity for the banksters and that so many of the players in this drama had office space in the Equity Building there, or within walking distance of it. One of those companies, Guaranty Trust laundered/transferred a huge amount of gold out of Russia and into the US in exchange for the goods that the Bolsheviks needed to solidify their power.
Oh yes, being a bankster boy pays off, unfortunately they threw him under the bus during the whole Depression thing.In January 1922 Secretary of Commerce Herbert Hoover, interceded with the State Department in behalf of a Guaranty Trust scheme to set up exchange relations with the "New State Bank at Moscow."
In 1920 a group to counter the Soviet Bureau and the Red Movement was established by, wait for it, JP Morgan. Yes the same bunch that passed the million bucks to Thompson to give to the Bolsheviks funds an anti-bolshevik group- rockin' the dialectic! If you want to win money on the horse race, bet on all the horses. Sutton gives his thoughts:
United Americans is the only documented example known to this writer of an organization assisting the Soviet regime and also in the forefront of opposition to the Soviets. This is by no means an inconsistent course of action, and further research should at least focus on the following aspects:
But hey, the banksters are equal opportunity dictatorial government supporters. Our buddy Thomas Lamont gave fascist dictator Mussolini a $100,000,000 loan. That's what they do now, no more freebies, they are into loans. As John Perkins says, they give the dictator a loan that they can't possibly repay and if they don't allow the resources to be taken from their country at below market value, don't allow a military base, or don't vote like they're supposed to at the UN, the jackals come and take a shot, and if that fails, the military is sent in for a little kinetic activity.(a) Are there other examples of double-dealing by influential groups generally known as the establishment?(b) Can these examples be extended into other areas? For example, is there evidence that labor troubles have been instigated by these groups?(c) What is the ultimate purpose of these pincer tactics? Can they be related to the Marxian axiom: thesis versus antithesis yields synthesis? It is a puzzle why the Marxist movement would attack capitalism head-on if its objective was a Communist world and if it truly accepted the dialectic. If the objective is a Communist world — that is, if communism is the desired synthesis — and capitalism is the thesis, then something apart from capitalism or communism has to be antithesis. Could therefore capitalism be the thesis and communism the antithesis, with the objective of the revolutionary groups and their backers being a synthesizing of these two systems into some world system yet undescribed?
What is the Marburg Plan and how does it affect us?
The governments of the world, according to the Marburg Plan, were to be socialized while the ultimate power would remain in the hands of the international financiers "to control its councils and enforce peace [and so] provide a specific for all the political ills of mankind.Don't you just love it when a central force "enforces" peace. They do this of course, by killing a whole lot of people. And then they look inside the mass grave and say, "don't they look so peaceful!"
---Nation's Business, February 1923, pp. 22-23.
The banksters are not really Americans, Soviets, Communists, Fascists, Democrats or Republicans. They are whatever they have to be at a particular time to meet their objectives. What are their objectives? As reported by Kathryn Casey, an attorney investigating on behalf of the Reece Committee of 1953, her reading of the founding minutes of the Carnegie Foundation (circa 1910) revealed:
1. Gain effective control of the State Department.
2. Gain control of the public education system.
3. Gain control of higher education, specifically the American History departments.When speaking of the Rockefeller's book, The Second American Revolution, Sutton summarizes:
The book contains a naked plea for humanism, that is, a plea that our first priority is to work for others. In other words, a plea for collectivism. Humanism is collectivism. It is notable that the Rockefellers, who have promoted this humanistic idea for a century, have not turned their OWN property over to others.. Presumably it is implicit in their recommendation that we all work for the Rockefellers. Rockefeller's book promotes collectivism under the guises of "cautious conservatism" and "the public good." It is in effect a plea for the continuation of the earlier Morgan-Rockefeller support of collectivist enterprises and mass subversion of individual rights.
I'll leave you with the links to the previous posts in this series, should you wish to join the party. I hope you will join me as blog the next enlightening book in our series, Wall Street and FDR. We will learn how many planks of the Communist Manifesto were nailed down amid the chaos of the Depression.
Chapter 1: Introduction that Will Blow your Mind
Chapter 2: Trotsky Leaves NY for Russia
Chapter 3: Germans and Banksters pay for Bolshevik Revolution
Chapter 4: Wall Street "Orchestrates" Revolutions all over the World
Chapter 5: The American Red Cross Mission to Russia
Chapter 6: Consolidation and Export of the Revolution
Chapter 7: The Bolsheviks Return to New York
Chapter 8: Is 120 Broadway, NYC a Portal to Hell?
Chapter 9: Guaranty Trust Goes to Russia
Chapter 10: JP Morgan Helps the Other Side
Chapter 11: The Alliance of Bankers and Revolution