Most people are blissfully unaware of the fact that—even now—certain  governments, militaries, and high net worth individuals are preparing for GLOBAL SYSTEMIC FINANCIAL FAILURE and a NEW INTERNATIONAL MONETARY SYSTEM which could occur anytime in the coming months and years!

The serious potential for this system-altering development has significant implications for the general public: the need to prepare for increasing levels of economic turmoil and SOCIAL UNREST that lead to GLOBAL SYSTEMIC FINANCIAL COLLAPSE.

So, while the mainstream media continues to advance the notion that we have averted a Second Great Depression—in this section, we’ll explore what the big boys and girls are saying behind the scenes about the global economy, sovereign debt and the risk for global systemic financial failure in the years ahead.

As we move further along, module by module, in this research area, you will begin to understand the following:

1. We are in a state of FINANCIAL WARFARE. This should be monitored closely because, historically, currency wars turn into trade wars which then turn into HOT WAR.
2. There is a serious risk for GLOBAL SYSTEMIC FINANCIAL FAILURE in the years ahead that could lead to the demise of the dollar as the world reserve currency and an entirely NEW INTERNATIONAL MONETARY SYSTEM.

According to the US Federal Reserve’s Advisory Council, in May 2013, “Current policy has created SYSTEMIC FINANCIAL RISKS and potential structural problems for banks.”

When Lehman Brothers fell in 2008, the global economy almost collapsed due to reckless lending, excessive risk, and a lack of transparency. Banks stopped lending to each other because they didn’t understand counterparty risk (the risk associated with derivative trading; repayment obligations; liquidity reserves; the value of collateral etc.).

We were all introduced to the idea of institutions that were TOO BIG TO FAIL. Certain financial institutions had become so large and interconnected within the global financial system that their demise threatened to suck the entire world into a global depression.

Today, despite our efforts to shore up risk in the financial sector, our policies have encouraged banks to get larger, more opaque and riskier! That’s right, you heard correctly, banks are taking the same kinds of risks that lead us to the 2008 crash—only, they are taking these risks on a much larger scale!

Today, analysts peg the derivative market at around $700 trillion—10 times the size of the global economy. “The market has grown so unfathomably vast, the global economy is at risk of MASSIVE DAMAGE should even a small percentage of contracts go sour.  Its size and potential influence are difficult just to comprehend, let alone assess.”

<Source: Denning, Steve. “Big Banks and Derivatives: Why Another Financial Crisis Is Inevitable.” 8 Jan 2013. Forbes Online. Web. 20 April. 2016. http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2013/01/08/five-years-after-the-financial-meltdown-the-water-is-still-full-of-big-sharks/  >

Here’s the thing—systems scientists have recently discovered that complex systems (like the derivatives market… also like the financial system) become MORE COMPLEX and MORE UNSTABLE as time goes on.  They evolve until they reach a ‘poised critical state’—way out of balance—where a minor disturbance can cause a disastrous cascade.

Guess what? Capital markets are complex systems—they exhibit all the defining characteristics: diversity of agents, interdependence, connectedness and adaptive behavior.

These kinds of systems defy prediction! Complex systems, like capital markets, cannot be reduced to simple models. In these kinds of systems, easy, mapable dynamics and simple interactions are like flying pigs!

One of the defining features of complex systems is that as the system doubles or triples in its scale, the potential for catastrophic failure increases by factors of 10 (if the system doubles) or 100 (if the system triples).

So… as the derivative market continues to grow unfathomably vast—so does the risk of catastrophic systemic failure!

Unfortunately, Congress will not act to dismantle large banks into more manageable sizes. I think we can all agree that an appropriate size is one that DOES NOT threaten either the national or global economy. Congress will not act to ban derivatives! Unfortunately, Congress appears firmly ensconced within the tentacles of Wall St. lobbyists.

So, the risk will continue to grow!

Think about this—the financial meltdown in 2008 destroyed approximately $60 trillion in wealth between October 2007 and March 2009. The Federal Reserve stepped in with tens of trillions of dollars (in money printing; swap lines etc.) to inject liquidity back into the global market place. Despite all its efforts, the Federal Reserve was barely able to prevent a complete meltdown. As you’ll learn in the modules ahead, the situation was so dire when the Obama administration took office, that the US government contemplated declaring a BANK HOLIDAY.

If the Federal Reserve was barely able to prevent a complete collapse in 2008, what do you think is going to happen when the next collapse occurs—a collapse bigger than 2008? Rest assured, there will be a bigger collapse.

Here are 4 important reasons why we can expect a bigger crisis:

• Systemic problems were not addressed.
  1. Banks are larger, more opaque and riskier than ever. Mega banks should have been dissolved into smaller units that don’t threaten national or global economies.
  2. One of the core contributing factors in the 2008 meltdown was lack of transparency and unknown risk brought on by involvement in the derivatives market. In 2007, the derivatives market was $500 trillion. It is now $700 trillion—10 times the size of the global economy. To this day, no one understands the risks in this market. Derivatives should have been banned.
  3. Commercial and investment banking should be separated. Affiliations between banks and security firms should be banned. Vital aspects of the Glass-Steagal Act should have been reenacted.

• After all the bailouts real growth has not returned. Instead, deflationary pressures (technically, the financial power brokers like to refer to this as disinflation which is supposed to be different from deflation) still loom in the US and EU.

• Governments have depleted their treasuries in addressing the 2008 crisis. Not only have they depleted their treasuries and gone into massive debt but they’ve also expended many of their financial policy options—they’ve depleted many of the financial arrows in their quivers.
  1. Governments have depleted their reserves in addressing the 2008 crisis. Bailouts on the order of 2008 are no longer a possibility. According to one of the top financial warfare analysts, James Rickards (the go-to-guy for the Pentagon and intelligence community on matters of financial warfare), the only clean balance sheet left among major financial institutions is the IMF. Any crisis will hit countries very hard.

• The capital markets are complex systems. They become more complex and unstable as time goes on. Eventually, they will reach a poised critical state where one variable; one person; one action; one institution will cascade the system.

So, what do you think will happen when the next crisis hits?

According to James Rickards (the go-to guy for financial warfare within US defense and intelligence circles)—the dollar as the reserve currency will most likely be on the chopping block! We’ll get into this later.

In 2013, the World Economic Forum reported, “Five years after the financial crisis, macroeconomic worries continue to weigh heavily on leader’s minds. This is confirmed by data from the World Economic Forum’s Quarterly Confidence Index as well as the Global Risks Perception Survey, in which respondents rated MAJOR SYSTEMIC FINANCIAL FAILURE as the economic risk of greatest systemic importance for the next 10 years.”

<Source: World Economic Forum. “Global Risks 2013.” Web. Accessed 20 April 2016. http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_GlobalRisks_Report_2013.pdf (See pg. 16) >

2 years later, in 2016, concerns over global systemic financial failure still loom large at renowned gatherings like the World Economic Forum (WEF). For several years now, reports have emanated from the WEF highlighting the fact that many of the business, financial and political power brokers in attendance are still VERY WORRIED about the global economy. According to many of them, the financial system is still not functioning correctly and it remains on an untenable trajectory.

For years now, since the start of the 2008 financial crisis, I have repeatedly found news articles highlighting the fact that many of the wealthy members of society (all over the world) are buying remote farms and properties in anticipation of SEVERE ECONOMIC DISTRESS and MASSIVE SOCIAL UNREST.

Some of the top minds in business, finance and politics around the world are worried about the possibility of major systemic financial failure during the next 10 years! As we’ll see later, it’s not just the political and business world that have grave concerns. The national security establishments in America, Britain, Switzerland and Russia consider major systemic financial failure a real threat and, as such, they are preparing!

Stay tuned: We will continue discussing this high risk/high consequence threat in the upcoming modules. Check back periodically as new modules will be uploaded soon.

 

For the past few hundred years, nation-states have been the dominant threat within the global security environment. But now there are two new complex and ambiguous threats.

And, as you’ll see in this chapter, these threats will have a huge impact on regular citizens in the coming years.

According to a respected professor at the U.S. Army War College’s Strategic Studies Institute, Max Manwaring, the two new threats are:

• Hegemonic non-state actors: These are composed of invisible power structures, transnational criminal organizations, insurgents, terrorists, gangs, private armies, non-state actors and virtual states. While some of these entities have always existed, they are now mutating to take on some of the roles historically reserved for the nation-state. With the advent of modern technology and the global grid, these entities have achieved an unprecedented level of power to disrupt and destroy.
• Indirect & Implicit Threats to Stability and Human Well-Being: Whether it’s the National Intelligence Strategy (2009) or the National Military Strategy (2011) or the testimony of the Commander of USNORTHCOM before the House Armed Services Committee (2011)—all agree that as far as indirect/implicit threats go—that global economic distress, the environment, emerging infectious disease, proliferation of WMD (weapons of mass destruction), and increasing resource scarcity (whether real or perceived) pose serious strategic risks to nation states. As a result, they also pose serious risks to individuals.

But, it’s not just that these new threats are complex and ambiguous.

Part of the danger is that they will develop synergies with other important technological, environmental, socio-economic and geopolitical factors. The end result will be a serious challenge for security and disaster management structures in the first half of the 21^st century.

In the end, as the challenge mounts, a whole new parallel, decentralized security structure will emerge. It will be a security structure in which regular citizens, private companies and local jurisdictions have much more responsibility for their own security.

But, before we get into the future global security environment, let’s discuss the present.

Threat #1-Hegemonic Non-State Actors

Hegemonic non-state actors are composed of invisible power structures, transnational criminal organizations, insurgents, terrorists, gangs, virtual states and private armies. While most of these entities have always existed, they are now mutating to take on some of the roles historically reserved for the nation-state. With the advent of modern technology and the global grid, these entities have achieved an unprecedented level of power to disrupt and destroy.

For the last few hundred years the prevailing theory was that interstate conflict (military conflict between nation-states) was the dominant threat to global security.

This assumption has now been turned on its head.

Modern warfare is primarily characterized by intrastate conflict—that is, conflict within—not across—a nation state’s borders. This kind of conflict involves non-state groups (religious or ethnic) fighting against the government or other non-state groups for independence, well-being or autonomy.

This shift is reflective of an ongoing change in the international distribution of power.

According to the Army’s Training and Doctrine Command, one of the most significant trends for the next 15 years is a shift in the global balance of power.

The US faces a balance of power shift ‘that rivals the end of the Cold War, if not that facing the nation at the conclusion of WWII.’ By 2028, the US will remain the world’s dominant political, economic and military power, but with a continually decreasing relative advantage over other nations. Emerging state powers and new, more powerful non-state actors will create a multipolar international system of power…. History indicates that ‘emerging multipolar systems have been more unstable than bipolar ones

<Source: US Army Training and Doctrine Command. (2012). Operational Environments to 2028: The Strategic Environment for Unified Land Operations. Retrieved from U.S. Department of Defense: http://www.arcic.army.mil/app_Documents/TRADOC_Paper_Operational-Environments-to-2028-Strategic-Environment-for-Unified-Land-Operations_AUG2012.pdf  (See pg. 15)>

In other words, we are entering a multipolar world: a world in which there are more than two dominant players (formerly the USSR and the US during the Cold War). And, equally important, we are entering a world in which the dominant players aren’t simply nation-states—they are also non-state actors.

What’s more, history indicates this new environment will be more unstable than what we experienced in the last 60 years! In this new environment, unconventional operational methods and non-state actors will have a greater and greater impact on U.S. military operations.

As a result, modern warfare is undergoing a major BLURRING OF TRADITIONAL BATTLE LINES. Now—this is a big deal for regular citizens!

For instance, as one Army report indicates, “Responding to these types of adversaries (non-state actors with unconventional operational methods) is already blurring the lines between civilian law enforcement and the military; it may also constrain and stress the use of political, economic and military power.’”

<Source: US Army Training and Doctrine Command. (2012). Operational Environments to 2028: The Strategic Environment for Unified Land Operations. Retrieved from U.S. Department of Defense: http://www.arcic.army.mil/app_Documents/TRADOC_Paper_Operational-Environments-to-2028-Strategic-Environment-for-Unified-Land-Operations_AUG2012.pdf  (See pg. 17)>

But, that isn’t the half of it—the implications are much larger!

What this new development means is that the traditional boundaries between war and crime; between war and politics; and between soldiers and civilians are now very blurred!

This has massive implications for what it means to be a regular citizen in the early 21^st century. Why? Because Martin van Creveld (a very respected military historian) discovered that throughout history, when distinctions between war and crime disappear, then DEFENSE BECOMES A LOCAL ENDEAVOR.

In other words, citizens, private companies and local governments become increasingly responsible for their own security!

 There is another big implication. What this state of affairs indicates is that we are, in essence, beginning to mirror the kind of warfare that existed in the pre-modern era.

In order to understand the future of warfare, Martin van Creveld encourages us to examine pre-modern warfare because he believes the future of warfare will have a lot in common with medieval warfare.

Listen to Martin van Creveld describe pre-modern warfare. This kind of warfare began during the medieval era (5^th-15^th centuries) and ended with the culmination of the Thirty Years’ War (1618-1648).

“In all these struggles political, social, economic, and religious motives were hopelessly entangled. Since this was an age when armies consisted of mercinaries, all were also attended by swarms of military entrepreneurs….Many of them paid little but lip service to the organizations for whom they had contracted to fight. Instead, they robbed the countryside on their own behalf…. Given such conditions, any fine distinctions… between armies on the one hand and peoples on the other were bound to break down. Engulfed by war, civilians suffered terrible atrocities.”

<Source: Kaplan, Robert D. The Coming Anarchy: Shattering the Dreams of the Post Cold War. New York: Random House, 2000. Print. (See pg. 46-47)>

Stay tuned: We will continue discussing the global security environment with the release of the next module. Check back periodically for new content as it will be added on an ongoing basis.

 

The story that follows will shake you to the core and cause you to question your entire worldview. I am warning you—this story is not for the faint of heart. BUT, rest assured, there is a solution!

It’s important that you know that this story is intricately linked to another one of my research areas: the quest to control food on this planet.

I became interested in researching population control when I was introduced to a declassified US security memorandum. So, let’s begin our story by travelling back in time to April 24, 1974, when Henry Kissinger issued National Security Study Memorandum 200 (NSSM 200) titled, Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests.

Kissinger sent this memorandum to the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), certain cabinet secretaries as well as other key agencies like the US Agency for International Development.

The significance of this document is that it is the first known instance in which Malthusianism became part of U.S. security policy.

Malthusian ideas are derived from Reverend Thomas Malthus’ economic and political thoughts. In 1798 Malthus wrote, An Essay on the Principle of Population. In this essay, Malthus explained his theory: whereas populations generally expand geometrically—the food supply only grows arithmetically. This then leads to periodic famine and death, thus, eliminating the “surplus” population. Of course, Malthus expected that these periodic famines would succeed in killing the weakest in society. Malthus believed that charity would only provoke more social problems. These ideas would later influence Social Darwinism in the late 1800s.

Social Darwinism is an idea that emerged in both England and the United States in the 1870s. This theory applied the Darwinian concepts of natural selection and survival of the fittest to politics and sociology. Someone who believes in Social Darwinism generally argues that the strong should “inherit the earth,” that the elite should see their power and wealth grow while the weak should decrease in power and wealth. This concept has influenced laissez-faire capitalism, racism, eugenics, imperialism, fascism and Nazism.

Back to the Malthusian-based NSSM 200.

At the heart of NSSM 200 was the idea that population growth in developing countries posed a possible security threat to the United States. These countries were those in which the U.S. had strong political, economic and strategic interests (e.g. key natural resources).

NSSM 200 targeted 13 key countries (Brazil, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Egypt, Nigeria, Mexico, Indonesia, the Philippines, Thailand, Turkey, Ethiopia, and Colombia) for a COVERT POPULATION REDUCTION PROGRAM.

Now, before I introduce you to the specific policy directives contained within NSSM 200, we must travel back in time to the mid-1880s. In order for you to understand NSSM 200 in its entirety, there are several other fascinating stories that need to be told. These stories are about how some very powerful people on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean became obsessed with eugenics and population reduction.

These stories defy belief… stories that are still playing out today… stories upon which your very life depends!

In 1883, Sir Francis Galton, the cousin of Charles Darwin, coined the term eugenics in his work, Inquiries into Human Faculty and its Development. Derived from the Greek language, eugenics is translated as “well-born.” Galton, inspired by Darwin’s theories on natural selection, hypothesized that humans could generate better offspring if talented/gifted people married only those with equal or greater endowment—breeding among the gifted and talented, if you will.

Eugenics is concerned with improving the human genetic pool via selective breeding and it includes the use of both positive and negative eugenics. In positive eugenics, those individuals with “desired traits” are encouraged to reproduce. In negative eugenics, people that possess “less-desired” or “undesired traits” are discouraged from reproducing. Historically, those who have espoused negative eugenics have resorted to 3 tactics:

1. Sterilize the “unfit”
2. Encourage those who are “unfit” to get abortions
3. Exterminate those who are “unfit”

Dr. Paul Bowman Popenoe (a US Army venereal disease specialist during WWI and one of the most prominent members of the American Eugenics Society in the first half of the 20^th century) gave us a window into this mindset when he made the following statement in Applied Eugenics, a textbook he co-authored:

From an historical point of view, the first method which presents itself is EXECUTION… It’s value in keeping up the standard of the race should not be underestimated.

<Source: Popenoe, Paul, and Roswell Hill Johnson. Applied Eugenics. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1918. E-book provided by The Project Gutenberg. Web. April 19, 2016. <http://www.gutenberg.org/files/19560/19560-h/19560-h.htm> (See page 184)>

Popenoe also discussed a form of natural selection he called “LETHAL SELECTION,” in which he advocated the importance of allowing nature to exterminate the “unfit” by, “some adverse feature of the environment, such as excessive cold, or bacteria; or by bodily Popenoe believed that between 50-66% of all deaths could be attributed to some form of natural selection (e.g. death as a result of overcrowding/overpopulation; starvation; disease; climate/environmental factors; bodily deficiency; reproductive issues). For Popenoe, these deaths were necessary—after all, the death of the so called “unfit” would improve the human genetic stock. As such, he lamented the fact that the “progress of medicine” would inevitably do much to diminish the death rate of the “unfit.”

So… where did this line of thinking come from and who, exactly, were the “unfit?”

In the late 1800’s and early 1900’s—influenced by the theories of Sir Francis Galton (Eugenics), Thomas Malthus (Malthusianism), Charles Darwin (Theory of Natural Selection), Herbert Spencer (Social Darwinism) and Gregor Mendel (Laws of Inheritance)—eugenicists defined the “unfit” as the poor… the physically handicapped… the mentally handicapped… criminals… those of an Eastern or Southern European lineage… Jews… Hispanics… those belonging to the lower socio-economic classes and all non-whites. As Adele Clark documents in her book, Disciplining Reproduction: Modernity, American Life Sciences and the Problems of Sex:

Eugenic conceptions of fitness were deeply class- and race-based, focusing on increased reproduction among the Anglo-Saxon upper classes and decreased reproduction among the lower classes, both white (especially in England) and of color (especially in the United States and in British colonial regimes).

<Source: Clarke, Adele E. Disciplining Reproduction: Modernity, American Life Sciences, and the Problems of Sex. Berkely, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press, 1998. Print. (See page 178)>

Few people understand the extent to which the eugenic ideology pervaded wealthy circles in Britain and America during the early 1900s. I wish I could say that this ideology died with the defeat of the Axis powers in WWII (Nazis are among the most infamous of eugenicists). But, on the contrary, eugenics merely went underground to become even more sinister than before. Today, often disguised with politically-correct terminology, it continues to infiltrate some of the most powerful circles in the world.

In this research area, I will highlight some of the more poignant moments in this astounding story.  Welcome to another fascinating story in underground history.

In 1907, the British Eugenics Society was founded in order to advance eugenic policies and education. While eugenics originated in England in the late 1800’s, it was not very long before it began infiltrating American society. While the American Eugenics Society wasn’t founded until 1926, a number of substantial eugenics laws, policies and research initiatives were launched in America in the early 1900’s.

In 1902, Stanford University President, David Starr Jordan, hypothesized that human qualities and conditions, like talent and poverty, were hereditary in his series of publications, The Blood of a Nation: A Study in the Decay of Races by the Survival of the Unfit. For eugenicists—the “right” race; a high degree of intelligence; and wealth were all important indicators of “fit” individuals.

It’s no coincidence that I’ve decided to start this eugenics story in California with Stanford University’s president. By the early 1900’s the State of California had become a model eugenics state. In 1909 it passed a eugenics law stating that anyone who was “feebleminded” and anyone who was a mental patient would be sterilized before being discharged. Furthermore, any criminal found guilty of ANY CRIME 3 times could be forcibly sterilized at the discretion of the attending physician.

California is particularly noteworthy with regard to American eugenics history. Prior to WWII, almost 1/2 of all forced sterilizations were conducted in California. Even after WWII, California remained an epicenter for the American eugenics movement as it was responsible for up to 1/3 of all forced sterilization surgeries in America.

Compulsory sterilization laws were eventually adopted by over 30 US states. Incredibly enough, some states were still sterilizing individuals into the late 1970’s. By the late 1970’s, over 60,000 US individuals had been forcibly sterilized.

 In 2002, Governor Mark Warner of Virginia formally apologized for Virginia’s role in the Supreme Court case Buck vs. Bell (1927) in which Virginia’s sterilization law was ruled constitutional. Upon being ruled constitutional, this Virginia law became the model eugenics law for other states. In Virginia alone approximately 7,450 people were forcibly sterilized between the years 1924-1979.

It might shock you to discover that it was American eugenics laws and ideology that inspired NAZI GERMANY’S MANDATORY STERILIZATION PROGRAM. This program led to approximately 350,000 sterilizations and, eventually, to the HOLOCAUST. We’ll get into this part of the story later. But now, let’s return to the early 1900’s… to the beginning of a dark plot.

Believe it or not, the idea of a Nordic master race was not originally Hitler’s although he would adopt it to devastating consequences. The idea of a blond-haired, blue-eyed master race actually originated with the eugenics movement in the United States. It’s a little acknowledged piece of American history, but American eugenicists published booklets touting the sterilization of the ‘unfit’ and distributed them to German scientists and officials in the decades leading up to WWII.

It might actually surprise many of you to discover that Hitler actually studied American eugenics laws. In The Secret History of the War on Cancer, Dr. Devra Davis documents a conversation between Hitler and a fellow Nazi:

“I have studied with great interest,” he told a fellow Nazi, “the laws of several American states concerning prevention of reproduction by people whose progeny would, in all probability, be of no value or be injurious to the racial stock.”

<Source: Davis, Devra. The Secret History of the War on Cancer. New York: Basic Books, 2007. Print. (See pg. 52)>

Hitler’s admiration for the American brand of eugenics is a matter of public record. On one occasion, he even admitted to being a fan of Madison Grant, an American eugenics leader.  Hitler wrote a fan letter to Grant in which he proudly stated that Grant’s book, The Passing of the Great Race, was his “Bible.”

I was shocked to discover that US connections to Nazi Germany ran very deep—too deep to thoroughly cover in this work. Nevertheless, you will get a slight glimpse into this aspect of underground American history.

Two institutions are of particular importance when highlighting US eugenics connections to Nazi Germany—the Carnegie Institute and the Rockefeller Foundation. In the 1920s, eugenics scientists at the Carnegie Institute had strong professional and personal ties with many German eugenicists. But, it was the Rockefeller Foundation that was particularly instrumental in the rise of eugenics in Nazi Germany. A little bit further in this story, we’ll discuss how the Rockefeller Foundation’s donations to eugenics research in Germany were so vast that the foundation actually steered eugenics research in Germany during the 1920’s.

For now, let’s travel back in time and pick up where we left our story in the early 1900s….

In 1910, one year after California passed its sterilization law, a sinister plan was hatched at Cold Springs Harbor, New York, with the advent of the Eugenics Record Office—an initiative of Charles Davenport under the auspices of the Carnegie Institute. The 3 primary funders were Mary Harriman (widow of Edward Henry Harriman, the railroad magnate); John D. Rockefeller Jr.; and the Carnegie Institute.

The Eugenics Record Office would become responsible for developing eugenic policies which would eventually lead to the sterilization of thousands of Americans. At its founding, the office asserted that 10% of the American population were “defectives,” and, that the office’s ultimate goal would be to sterilize 14-15 million Americans.

But, that’s not even the most shocking thing associated with the Eugenics Record Office.

In 1911, one year after its founding, the Eugenics Record Office embarked on a eugenics venture with the Carnegie-funded American Breeders Association—to conduct a study on the Best Practical Means for Cutting off the Defective Germ-Plasm in the Human Population. The committee’s intentions, in their own words, were the following:

It is the purpose of the committee to investigate all phases of the problem of CUTTING OFF THE SUPPLY OF DEFECTIVES, and to publish from time to time data which will, we trust, aid the student of social affairs in weighing any particular phase of the problem that may present itself. The committee will therefore study the facts in reference to the numbers of and the rate and manner of increase of the SOCIALLY INADEQUATE. It will strive to analyze the factors of heredity and environment in the production of the social unfitness observed. It will report first-hand facts concerning the drag that these classes entail upon the general welfare, and will review the first-hand studies in human heredity that have been made by careful study of the problem. And finally the committee will point out what appears as a result of study to be ‘THE BEST PRACTICAL MEANS,’ so far as the innate traits are a factor, OF PURGING THE BLOOD OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE OF THE HANDICAPPING AND DETERIORATING INFLUENCES OF THESE ANTI-SOCIAL CLASSES.  

<Source: Laughlin, Harry H. Bulletin No. 10A: Report of the Committee to Study and Report on the Best Practical Means of Cutting Off the Defective Germ-Plasm in the American Population. National Information Resource on Ethics and Human Genetics, The Joseph and Rose Kennedy Institute of Ethics and Georgetown University Library Online, Feb. 1914. Web. 19 April. 2016. <https://repository.library.georgetown.edu/bitstream/handle/10822/556985/Bulletin10A.pdf?sequence=1> (See pg. 6)>

Astounding isn’t it?! This committee intended to investigate the best means for wiping out entire bloodlines in order to “purge” the American population of “defective” hereditary traits. The committee’s conclusions are equally horrifying.

The committee concluded that they would take a long-term approach in which segregation and sterilization would form the core of their strategy.  So… for approximately 34 years the Eugenic Record Office gathered millions of index cards cataloguing the bloodlines of ordinary Americans in order to plan for the future elimination of entire bloodlines that were deemed inferior. The office planned on exposing these bloodlines to lifelong SEGREGATION and STERILIZATION in order to, “KILL THEIR BLOODLINES.”

It remains inconceivable to me, nevertheless, the people that espoused these kinds of ideas weren’t the outcasts of society—these were some of the richest most powerful people within American and British circles:

• Andrew Carnegie
• Carnegie Institute
• Rockefeller Institute
• John D. Rockefeller Jr.
• John D. Rockefeller III
• Ford Foundation
• Harriman Family
• Clarence Gamble (Heir to the Proctor and Gamble soap company fortune)
• Alexander Graham Bell (Board of Scientific Advisors, Eugenics Record Office)
• President Theodore Roosevelt
• P. Morgan Jr.
• Mary Duke Biddle (of the tobacco family)
• John Harvey Kellogg (from the breakfast cereal)
• British Chancellor of the Exchequer, Winston Churchill
• Economist John Maynard Keynes
• Arthur Lord Balfour
• Julian Huxley (the first Director of UNESCO)
• And many more….

Even President Theodore Roosevelt was a eugenicist! And, he wouldn’t be the last president. But, we’ll get to that story later. For now, consider what President Roosevelt said in 1913 (4 years after he left office) in a letter to his friend, Charles B. Davenport. Davenport was a Harvard professor, an avowed eugenicist, and the man who campaigned for and first founded the Eugenics Record Office under the auspices of the Carnegie Institute:

My dear Mr. Davenport: I am greatly interested in the two memoirs you have sent me. They are very instructive, and, from the standpoint of our country, very ominous. You say that these people are not themselves responsible, that it is “society” that is responsible. I agree with you if you mean, as I suppose you do, that society has no business to permit degenerates to reproduce their kind. It is really extraordinary that our people refuse to apply to human beings such elementary knowledge as every successful farmer is obliged to apply to his own stock breeding. Any group of farmers who permitted their best stock not to breed, and let all the increase come from the worst stock, would be treated as fit inmates for an asylum. Yet we fail to understand that such conduct is rational compared to the conduct of a nation which permits unlimited breeding from the worst stocks, physically and morally, while it encourages or connives at the cold selfishness or the twisted sentimentality as a result of which the men and women ought to marry, and if married have large families, remain celebates or have no children or only one or two. Some day we will realize that the prime duty the inescapable duty of the good citizen of the right type to leave his or her blood behind him in the world; and that we have no business to permit the perpetuation of citizens of the wrong type.

<Source: “Creative Commons Theadore Roosevelt letter to C. Davenport about ‘degenerates reproducing’” by Theodore Roosevelt is license under CC Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License. Web. April 19, 2016. <https://www.dnalc.org/view/11219-T-Roosevelt-letter-to-C-Davenport-about-degenerates-reproducing-.html> Image 1242 American Philosophical Society Library, Permission Necessary for Reproduction. The Outlook 287 Fourth Avenue New York Lawrence F. Abbott President William B. Howland Treasurer Karl V.S. Howland Secretary Lyman Abbott Editor in Chief Hamilton W. Mable Associate Editor Theodore Roosevelt Contributing Editor January 3rd 1913. This work by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.>

A few years later a new eugenics campaign was launched. This initiative would have far-reaching repercussions. But, that is a story for our next module.

Stay tuned for the next module where we will continue with this fascinating story in underground US history.

 

 

I would like to begin this fascinating story with a quote from a declassified, top-secret US State Department document:

We have about 50% of the world’s wealth but only 6.3% of its population. This disparity is particularly great as between ourselves and the peoples of Asia. In this situation, we cannot fail to be the object of envy and resentment. Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity without positive detriment to our national security. To do so, we will have to dispense with all sentimentality and daydreaming; and our attention will have to be concentrated everywhere on our immediate national objectives. We need not deceive ourselves that we can afford today the luxury of altruism and world-benefaction.

-George Kenan, US State Department, Director of Policy Planning, 1948

<Source: Memo by George Kennan, Head of the US State Department Policy Planning Staff. Written February 28, 1948, Declassified June 17, 1974. George Kennan, “Review of Current Trends, U.S. Foreign Policy, Policy Planning Staff, PPS No. 23. Top Secret. Included in the U.S. Department of State, Foreign Relations of the United States, 1948, volume 1, part 2 (Washington DC Government Printing Office, 1976), 509-529.>

During the 1930’s when the entire United States was reeling from the Great Depression, a highly influential group of bankers, businessmen, academics and government representatives were meeting to devise a strategy for the new “Pax Americana.” As William Engdahl documents in his fascinating book, Seeds of Destruction, “Their aim was simple: to consolidate an American succession to the failing Pax Britannica of the British Empire.”

They realized, well before WWII, that the US market was too small for their appetites. In their eyes, “Manifest Destiny,” in the 20th century should entail unlimited American expansion globally.

Towards that end, members of the American East Coast Establishment (the elite members of society… the movers and the shakers… those in-the-know) formed a highly influential policy group in 1939, the War and Peace Studies Group of the New York Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). This project was confidential at the time as top members of the CFR worked collaboratively with the US State Department in order to determine US policy. Financed by the Rockefeller Foundation, this secret group would come to define post-war strategic planning for the US State Department (DOS). After 1942, most of its members would be signed onto the State Department’s payroll.  In the end, this group’s strategy would also define the post-war American business empire globally. From that time onward, CFR members have continually fueled the corridors of power.

To this day, the CFR remains influential within foreign policy circles at the highest level. It is no coincidence that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stated the following at a CFR meeting on July 15, 2009:

Thank you very much, Richard, and I am delighted to be here in these new headquarters.  I have been often to I guess the mother ship in New York City, but it’s good to have an outpost of the Council right here down the street from the State Department.  We get a lot of advice from the Council, so this will mean I won’t have as far to go to be told what we should be doing and how we should think about the future.

<Source: Clinton, Hillary Rodham. “Foreign Policy Address at the Council on Foreign Relations.” Council of Foreign Relations. Washington, DC. 15 July 2009. Speech. Web. Accessed April 19, 2016. http://video.state.gov/en/video/29636586001>

Now, let’s get back to our story.

One of the prime objectives of the War and Peace Studies Group was to identify target areas around the world that had to be CONTROLLED in order to support robust economic growth in the United States. Thus, the concept of an American “GRAND ARENA” was born. This area included Europe; Latin America; Britain, its colonies and commonwealth nations; and all of Southeast Asia (as a source of raw materials).

Thus, the integration and defense of the “Grand Arena” became one of the top national priorities. After WWII, the mechanisms for accomplishing this grand task would become evident. The United States would achieve the integration and defense of the Grand Arena with the help of new supranational organizations like the United Nations, the International Monetary Fund, and the World Bank.

The CFR conducted another important study at this time called the Financial and Economic Experts. This study looked at the United States’ economic needs during a time of war (this was just prior to U.S. entry into WWII). The study divided the world into 4 main areas: continental Europe; the U.S. and Western hemisphere; United Kingdom along with its colonial and commonwealth nations; and the Far-East-Pacific (Japan, China, Dutch East Indies). The study then compiled a list of all significant imports and exports within those 4 blocs.

The study was completed in the fall of 1940 and sent to President Roosevelt and the State Department. Among the conclusions was that larger export markets were needed… that America needed ‘living space’ throughout the entire Western hemisphere and beyond… that America needed TRADE and ‘ECONOMIC INTEGRATION’ with the British Empire/Commonwealth blocs and with the Far East… America needed free access to both raw materials and global markets.

William Engdahl documents the subtleties of their refined strategy in his fascinating, must-read book, Seeds of Destruction:

“Their strategy had been to create a kind of informal empire, one in which America would emerge as the unchallenged hegemonic power in a new world order to be administered through the newly-created United Nations Organization.

The architects of the post-war US-dominated global order explicitly chose not to call it an ‘empire.’ Instead, the United States would project its imperial power under the guise of COLONIAL ‘LIBERATION,’  support for ‘DEMOCRACY’ and ‘FREE MARKETS.’ It was one of the most effective and diabolical propaganda coups of modern times….

These American policy makers were largely concentrated among the select membership of the New York Council on Foreign Relations. Unlike the British Empire, their American vision of global domination was based on economic goals rather than physical possession of a colonial empire. It was a brilliant refinement which allowed the US corporate giants to veil their interests behind the flag of democracy and human rights for “oppressed colonial peoples,” support of “free enterprise” and “open markets….”

In early 1941, some 10 months before the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor, Henry Luce, publisher of “Time” and “Life” magazines, and a well-connected member of the East Coast elite, wrote an editorial in the Feb 17 issue of “Life” entitled, “The American Century.” In his essay, Luce described the emerging consensus of the US East Coast establishment around the CFR.

‘Tyrannies,’ Luce wrote, ‘may require a large amount of living space; but Freedom requires and will require far greater living space than Tyranny.’ He made an open call for Americans to embrace a new role as the dominant power in the world, a world in which the US had not yet entered the war. He wrote, ‘the cure to this: to accept wholeheartedly our duty and our opportunity as the most powerful and vital nation in the world and in consequence TO EXERT UPON THE WORLD THE FULL IMPACT OF OUR INFLUENCE, FOR SUCH PURPOSES AS WE SEE FIT AND BY SUCH MEANS AS WE SEE FIT.’

Luce was reflecting the emerging view of the internationally-oriented US business and banking establishment around Morgan and Rockefeller. They needed unfettered access to global resources and markets after the war, and they saw the golden chance to get it while all contending powers had been devastated by war.…

The American banking and industrial giants needed room, or what some called a Grand Area. The Economic & Financial Group of the CFR War & Peace Studies made a survey of world trade in the late 1930’s. They proposed linking the Western Hemisphere with the Pacific into a US-dominated bloc, which was premised on what they called ‘military and economic supremacy for the US.’ (pg. 105)

As Bowman and others of the CFR State Department study group saw it, the champions of the new American economic geography would define themselves as the selfless advocates of freedom for colonial peoples and as the enemy of imperialism. They would champion world peace through multinational control. Since the late days of WWI, when Bowman had worked on the Inquiry, a top-secret strategy group of President Woodrow Wilson, Bowman had been occupied with HOW TO CLOTHE AMERICAN IMPERIAL AMBITIONS IN LIBERAL AND BENEVOLENT GARB.  

As Bowman and other CFR planers envisioned it, the American domination of the world after 1945 would be accomplished via a new organization, the UN, including the new Bretton Woods institutions of the IMF and World Bank, as well as GATT.

Bowman’s CFR group had drafted the basic outline for President Roosevelt of what would become the UN organization. Under the BANNER OF “FREE TRADE” and the OPENING OF CLOSED MARKETS AROUND THE WORLD, US big business would advance their agenda, forcing open new untapped markets for cheap raw materials as well as new outlets for selling American manufacturers after the war. (pg. 106)

For the CFR and the forward-looking members of the US policy-making establishment, after WWII, global power would no longer be measured in terms of military control over colonial territories. The British and European empires proved to be a system far too costly and inefficient. Power would be defined directly in economic terms. It would be based on what one Harvard proponent, Joseph Nye, later was to call ‘soft power.'” (pg. 107)

<Source: Engdahl, William F. Seeds of Destruction: The Hidden Agenda of Genetic Manipulation. Quebec: Global Research, 2007. Print. (See pages 105-107)>

Fascinating history, isn’t it? How many of you learned that history growing up? I expect not many! But, it’s not the fault of teachers or historians because much of this history was classified for decades.

These obscure historical accounts provide an important backdrop for understanding the roots of the quest to control food on a global scale. It has become commonplace to assert that the establishment of American hegemony was accidental and that it has been benevolent, desirable and reluctant. As historical record shows, that assertion is far too simplistic.

By the end of this story you will see that the control of food is merely the means to an important end—the control of humans on a planetary scale.  As one of the most renowned former national security advisors is rumored to have said:

Control the oil, and you control nations. Control the food, and you control the people.

-Henry Kissinger, Former US Secretary of State & National Security Advisor

Starting after WWI and culminating at the start of WWII, the strategy for establishing an informal American empire was set in place.

Stay Tuned: We will be continuing this fascinating story in underground US history in the next module. Check back periodically as new modules will be added on an ongoing basis.