Conspiracies Hidden within Conspiracies: The Agenda Is Never the Agenda

The political class seems never to tire of ‘socialism’ and ‘communism.’ There are those who openly embrace, by name, this single phenomenon which carries these two labels: those who speak fondly of socialism.

There are also those who embrace this one political spirit without using either of its names, having learned that ‘socialism’ and ‘communism’ are still uncomfortable words for much of the public.

Finally, there are a few brave individuals who openly oppose socialism and communism, and are stigmatized both by their peers in the political class and by news media.

A majority of the people in each of the above-named three categories have at least this one thing in common: whether they openly support, covertly support, or directly oppose the international communist conspiracy, they do not realize that what they are supporting or opposing is merely one component of a much larger movement — a movement which is not communism or socialism, and which has nothing to do with what these people support or oppose.

This can be made clear by considering the following two questions: (1) Why is there a clique of ultra-wealthy individuals who are prominent advocates for socialism and communism? (2) Why do these same individuals ensure that their personal wealth is not touched by whichever measures are implemented to advance the causes of socialism and communism?

Why would people who have billions of dollars embrace and support movements which have the stated goal of confiscating that money? If they truly believe in helping those in poverty, would they not already be giving that money to worthy charities, rather than waiting for some future day when the socialist plan is ultimately implemented?

Under the slogan demanding that citizens “pay their fair share,” the incremental programs and legislations which advance the socialist agenda nonetheless seem to leave the ultra-wealthy in possession of their billions and hundreds of billions, while middle-class wage earners pay ever higher tax rates.

The most reasonable explanation is that these advocates of socialism do not want socialism, but rather have found that they can harness the socialist movement to do other, different, tasks. Rather than using the movement to advance socialism, they have found ways to use it to advance their own personal agendas.

At this level of operation, the difference between ‘communism’ and ‘socialism’ is a nuance left to academic debates. The vocabulary is chosen for its political leverage, not for precise definition of ideologies.

The international communist conspiracy is a small part of a far bigger, and very different, conspiracy, as historian Gary Allen writes:

What you call "Communism" is not run from Moscow or Peking, but is an arm of a bigger conspiracy run from New York, London and Paris. The men at the apex of this movement are not Communists in the traditional sense of that term.

The paradox of individuals who have hundreds of billions of dollars making common cause with the “workers of the world” presents a contradiction. This contradiction points to the hidden agenda. The prima facie agenda is the redistribution of wealth from the rich to the poor. Clearly, the billionaires have proven by their actions that they have no desire to relinquish their wealth. When it appears that two disparate parties are united to achieve a shared aim, and that shared aim is clearly detrimental to one of the parties, and that party has already shown that it in truth does not embrace this allegedly shared aim, then the conclusion is that there is a different hidden aim.

The power brokers who are fueling the socialist movements, and whose names are well-known as proponents of socialism, “feel no loyalty to” to these movements and ideologies. They feel no loyalty to socialist governments and parties around the globe, even as they passionately advocate for them.

Individuals who live in first-world democracies, and who have hundreds of billions of dollars, are products of, and depend upon, free-market economies. Socialism and communism would destroy them. Why, then, do they promote these redistributionist ideologies? Only because they have found a different, hidden purpose for which they can use these ideologies — or more precisely, for which they can use these movements and parties.

Gary Allen explains how the ultra wealthy utilize these ideologies for their own purposes:

They are loyal only to themselves and their undertaking. And these men certainly do not believe in the clap-trap pseudo-philosophy of Communism. They have no intention of dividing their wealth. Socialism is a philosophy which conspirators exploit, but in which only the naive believe. Just how finance capitalism is used as the anvil and Communism as the hammer to conquer the world will be explained in this book.

At this level, both capitalism — “finance capitalism” as Gary Allen phrases it — and communism are merely tools for the powerful to gain yet more power.

The capitalists and socialists who fight each other in the trenches of street-level politics are equally pawns in a game being played at a higher level. Gary Allen continues:

The concept that Communism is but an arm of a larger conspiracy has become increasingly apparent throughout the author's journalistic investigations. He has had the opportunity to interview privately four retired officers who spent their careers high in military intelligence. Much of what the author knows he learned from them. And the story is known to several thousand others. High military intelligence circles are well aware of this network. In addition, the author has interviewed six men who have spent considerable time as investigators for Congressional committees. In 1953, one of these men, Norman Dodd, headed the Reece Committee's investigation of tax-free foundations. When Mr. Dodd began delving into the role of international high finance in the world revolutionary movement, the investigation was killed on orders from the Eisenhower-occupied White House. According to Mr. Dodd, it is permissable to investigate the radical bomb throwers in the streets, but when you begin to trace their activities back to their origins in the "legitimate world," the political iron curtain slams down.

The Reece Committee discovered, e.g., that the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) published a list of its members, but maintained a separate list of clandestine members. This finding raises many questions.

The top-level conspiracy has employed the lower-level conspiracies to occupy the attention of the public. Debates between the major parties in the United States are mere sideshows. Protests and demonstrations serve to keep the news media busy reporting about them, and keep the commentators busy having opinions about them.

These distractions successfully prevent the public from discovering the true conspiracy.

At the highest levels of functioning, the conspiracy is truly global — beyond international — and is utterly indifferent to the geographical boundaries and legal domains of various nation-states. They see and treat the world as a large undifferentiated mass. They merely adjust their tactics to suit the context of locally varying conditions.

An axiom, which can be found in slightly different phrasings in the writings of those investigate such things, explains that the agenda is never the agenda, and the issue is never the issue. Despite its stated purpose, a movement is being used to achieve other and different goals — and the members of the movement are unaware.

Bilderberg: The Little-Known Group and Whether It’s Part of a Conspiracy

The average citizen or voter in any country is likely to know nothing about the Bilderberg Group. The group’s main function is to organize an annual or biannual private conference. It seems that the group has no formal membership list; people are simply invited to attend its meetings. There is a defined “steering committee,” and vague indications that there is also a separate “advisory group,” but otherwise the group seems to have little formal structure.

The group seems to be prima facie a networking and discussion group. It has no legal authority and is not recognized by, or as a part of, any national government. As of November 2022, the group’s website stated:

The Bilderberg Meeting is an annual conference designed to foster dialogue between Europe and North America. Every year, between 120-140 political leaders and experts from industry, finance, labor, academia and the media are invited to take part in the Meeting. About two thirds of the participants come from Europe and the rest from North America; approximately a quarter from politics and government and the rest from other fields.

The Bilderberg Meeting is a forum for informal discussions about major issues. The meetings are held under the Chatham House Rule, which states that participants are free to use the information received, but neither the identity nor the affiliation of the speaker(s) nor any other participant may be revealed.

Thanks to the private nature of the Meeting, the participants take part as individuals rather than in any official capacity, and hence are not bound by the conventions of their office or by pre-agreed positions. As such, they can take time to listen, reflect and gather insights. There is no detailed agenda, no resolutions are proposed, no votes are taken and no policy statements are issued.

The group could seem to be innocent and even laudable. Perhaps it is. Yet it has continually attracted skepticism and criticism. Some historians see it as possibly part of an international conspiracy. The group’s privacy and informality fuel such conjectures.

The news media have made the phrase “conspiracy theory” a commonplace. Some allegations of conspiracy are lunatic inventions with no supporting evidence. Other conspiracies have been demonstrated, either in the legal system or by scholars, to be concrete realities.

Some scholars have attempted to link the Bilderberg Group to another possible node in a conspiracy network, the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), as historian Gary Allen notes:

It should not be surprising to learn that there is on the international level an organizational equivalent of the C.F.R. This group calls itself the Bilderbergers. If scarcely one American in a thousand has any familiarity with the C.F.R., it is doubtful that one in five thousand has any knowledge of the Bilderbergers. Again, this is not accidental.

Serious scholars who investigate possible conspiracies run the risk of being categorized among the paranoid yellow journalists who publish baseless speculations. How do historians analyze the conspiracies while maintaining high academic standards?

The CFR publishes, among other things, a periodical titled Foreign Affairs. This journal includes relatively prosaic articles which don’t reek of conspiracy. On the other hand, individuals associated with the CFR include Cyrus Eaton. There are two men with that name — Cyrus Eaton, Sr. and Cyrus Eaton, Jr. — and their connection with the Soviet Socialists, i.e., with the international communist conspiracy, is clear, as historian Gary Allen explains:

Cyrus Eaton Jr. is the son of the notoriously pro Soviet Cyrus Eaton, who began his career as secretary to John D. Rockefeller. It is believed that Eaton’s rise to power in finance resulted from backing by his mentor. The agreement between Tower International and IBEC continues an old alliance. Although Eaton’s name does not appear on the CFR's membership rolls, the Reece Committee which investigated foundations for Congress in 1953, found that Eaton was a secret member.

The two entities named above — Tower International and the International Basic Economy Corporation (IBEC) — both appear to be, at first glance, business enterprises: the former in mining and metals, the latter in agronomics. Yet both had ties to the Stalinist economic system in the USSR. Cyrus Eaton, who brought Tower International into being, was awarded the Lenin Peace Prize by the Soviet government; he had easy access to East Germany and Russia at a time when most U.S. citizens found it difficult to obtain visas and travel papers to such places. IBEC was associated with David Rockefeller, who also launched the Americas Society; between IBEC and the Americas Society, Rockefeller had numerous connections to the leaders who were hoping to give the Soviet Union a foothold in South America and Central America.

Cementing the ties to Stalin, Khruschev, and Moscow were the joint efforts by Cyrus Eaton and Aramand Hammer to plan and carry out massive building projects, through the Tower Corporation, in the Soviet Union. As historians Stan Evans and Herbert Romerstein write,

The importance of Hammer’s U.S.-Soviet business dealings can’t be overstated, as the Communists would be chronically reliant on Western funding, credits, and technology to help them through their economic troubles. (Conversely, it was when the credits and technical assistance were cut back under Reagan that the creaking Soviet machinery collapsed and Mikhail Gorbachev had to adjourn the Cold War.) U.S. capitalists who followed the trail blazed by Hammer included W. Averell Harriman, Henry Ford, the Morgan interests, Cyrus Eaton, Mack Truck, Chase Manhattan, Control Data, and several other U.S. corporations. Such dealings were of utmost importance in keeping the Soviets economically afloat for a span of nearly seven decades.

The CFR, of which Cyrus Eaton was a member, was founded in 1921, in the same milieu as the League of Nations. The CFR was founded in the spirit of Woodrow Wilson, but by that time, he was out of office and mentally disabled. More directly relevant to the founding of the CFR was Edward House, known as “Colonel House,” who had been an associate of Wilson’s, although the two had also disagreed and eventually parted ways.

These organizations — the Bilderberg, the CFR, the League of Nations — are large enough, and structurally ambiguous enough, that they could house conspiracies, even if the organizations themselves were unaware of the conspiracies, or more likely pretended not to notice such conspiracies. The informal backchannel conversations and the overlapping memberships held by various individuals make it possible and even probable that secret deals and plans were developed in such an environment.

One sign of a conspiracy is the collaboration between individuals whose interests and motives should be opposite. A capitalist business owner, whose livelihood comes from a free-market economy, would seemingly find very little common cause with a bureaucrat who operates within the Soviet Socialist command economy. Yet such connections arise. These connections might be innocent — if both parties find a working relationship advantageous. But such connections, especially when they present the union of what should be diametrically opposed ideologies, point to a hidden agenda.

Economic support for, or even cooperation with, the Soviet Union worked against the causes of peace and justice. An array of individuals demonstrably engaged in activities which supported the Soviet Socialists economically or in other ways. These individuals held memberships in a variety of organizations, including the CFR, the Bilderberg Group, and the League of Nations. (Other such organizations include the Institute of Pacific Relations.)

A preponderance of evidence points to these organizations having — knowingly or not — hosted conspiracies. The likelihood of these individuals having used these organizations as occasions for communication constitutes a clear and convincing case for conspiracy.

Each of these organizations had numerous connections to other organizations and to various businesses, extending the network, as historian Gary Allen reports:

The strange name of this group is taken from the site of the first meeting in May, 1954 — the Hotel de Bilderberg — in Oosterbeek, Holland. The man who created the Bilderbergers is His Royal Highness Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands. The Prince is an important figure in Royal Dutch Petroleum (Shell Oil) and the Societe General de Belgique, a huge conglomerate cartel with worldwide holdings. The Bilderbergers meet once — or sometimes twice — a year. Those in attendance include leading political and financial figures from the United States and Western Europe. Prince Bernhard makes no effort to hide the fact that the ultimate goal of the Bilderbergers is a world government. In the meantime, while the “new world order” is being built, the Bilderbergers coordinate the efforts of the European and American power elites.

Among the remaining questions is to which extent these organizations were deliberately the homes for conspiracy, and to which extent they were unwitting dupes. The probability is overwhelming that there were also individual members of these groups who were unaware of such secret conspiracies. Indeed, it belongs to the nature of such conspiracies that they operate behind and among innocent and unwitting individuals and organizations: they are not merely conspiracies, but covert conspiracies.

Skepticism about the Bilderberg Group can only be fueled by the fact that Stacy Abrams is listed as a member of the Group’s “steering committee.”

Also on the steering committee was Jack Sheinkman. He was a member of the Workmen’s Circle, a social organization whose membership was largely innocent. But within that organization was a group of leftist, pro-communist members. As the New York Times explains,

In an era when labor leaders were reluctant to defend leftist movements overseas, Mr. Sheinkman led labor’s opposition to President Ronald Reagan’s efforts to remove the leftist government of Nicaragua.

Daniel Ortega, supported by Jack Sheinkman, is now largely seen as someone who egregiously violates human rights. The New York Times reports that Ortega has an “increasingly brutal and repressive strategy to quell the opposition movement and has tightened his grip on his power.” Ortega “shut down a popular television station, jailed its news director and expelled international human rights observers.”

Jack Sheinkman was one of the people who enabled Daniel Ortega to become the dictator of Nicaragua. Jack Sheinkman was not only a part of the Bilderberg Group, but rather also a member of its steering committee.

The question about the Bilderberg Group, then, is not a simple “yes or no” question, rather a question about the extent to which the official organizers of the group are aware of the conspiratorial activity, and to which extent conspiracies were the purpose for the creation of the group.