After reading Antony C. Sutton’s America’s Secret Establishment, I felt challenged to prove his central hypothesis: that the elites who control the American State deliberately created and then “managed” the conflicts between capitalism and communism, the political “right” and “left”, in order to transform these opposing forces into a synthesis of a higher order. In more philosophical terms, these elites use a dialectical process, based on Hegelian logic, to create a predetermined historical synthesis. According to German philosopher Georg W. F. Hegel history develops itself in ever-renewing movements and counter movements, a process he called the dialectic, thus developing from thesis and antithesis into a higher new synthesis.i In 1983 Sutton declared that because of the expanding power of these elites, this synthesis will gradually appear as a New World Order, which apparently, or so at least an increasing number of people are claiming this to be fact, is manifesting itself at this very moment before our own eyes. Political analyst William F. Engdahl observed that since the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 the Pentagon called it ‘Full Spectrum dominance,’ a “step-by-careful-step [..] military strategy for domination of the entire planet,…including the high seas, land, air, space and even outer space and cyberspace.”ii Why are there so few people who are aware of these developments?


Sutton was first struck by this idea to explain history within the larger dialectical Hegelian framework, when he discovered that the U.S. had actually build the Soviet Union, which at the same time was also the proclaimed enemy.iii Because of these contradictory actions Sutton could therefore at first not explain why the US had done this: why they boosted Soviet military power and simultaneously U.S. military power, and why they also transferred technology to Hitler’s Germany? Then Sutton discovered that there “has been a continuing, albeit concealed, alliance between international political capitalists and international revolutionary socialists – to their mutual benefit”. An alliance which has gone unnoticed “largely because historians – with a few notable exceptions – have an unconscious Marxian bias and are thus licked into the impossibility of any such alliance existing.”iv One of the notable exceptions was historian Carroll Quigley. In his comprehensive work Tragedy & Hope Quigley also documented the existing links between Wall Street and the Communists, the chief link being the Thomas W. Lamont family, who became partner of the Morgan firm in 1913. “The chief evidence” of these links between Wall Street and the Communists, Quigley observed, “can be found in the files of the HUAC [House Un-American Activities Committee] which show Tom Lamont, his wife Flora, and his son Corliss as sponsors and financial angels to almost a score of extreme Left organisations, including the Communist Party itself….Among its officers were…Frederick Vanderbilt Field (another link between Wall Street and the Communists).”v

Because of this discovery, knowing that these Wall street bankers were very powerful, Sutton was drawn to the question whether human descriptive history in the West as well as in Marxist countries can be understood and analysed within the framework of “right” and “left.” Again, something that has been “completely ignored by historians, including Marxists, is that any clash between these forces cannot lead to a society which is either capitalist or communist but must lead to a society characterized by a synthesis of the two conflicting forces:”vi a New World Order.


Precisely this is what was being announced literally by former president George Bush sr., not two years after the Soviet Union had collapsed: a New World Order. But taking into account what has just been mentioned, we have to ask what Bush sr. truly meant when he spoke to all nations the legendary words: “When we are successful, and we will be, we’ll have a real chance at this new world order, an order in which a credible United Nations can use its peacekeeping role to fulfil the promise and vision of the UN’s founders.” What did actually happen when the Berlin Wall fell? Did the US bring the American dream of freedom, prosperity and democracy?

After the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, the conflict between two opposing forces, capitalism and communism, had apparently been dissolved, announcing the birth of a new era of which Bush spoke. But although a large part of the world was in a euphoric state, and the countries which had been under Soviet domination were ready to embrace American-style democracy, for that was what they thought they would inherit, the changes the US had planned turned out to be “a form of economic shock-therapy,” shattering the dreams and leaving people in devastation. Engdahl notes, “The IMF technocrats, under orders from US Treasury Secretary and former Wall Street banker, Robert Rubin, demanded immediate privatization of all state-owned industries, devaluation of the Russian ruble, and devaluation of each of the other six national currencies.” And so instead of a better life of freedom and prosperity, “unemployment exploded and living standards plummeted.” Not only did life expectancy for Russian men drop to 56 years, but “the elderly were left without pensions or adequate medical care in many cases. Schools were closed; housing fell into disrepair; alcoholism, drug addiction and AIDS spread among Russian youth.”vii

Obviously, the contradictory actions of the US government will lead to more tension and to an eruption of violence, also against the American nation. That is why some people suggested that the acts of terrorism could have been committed in retaliation for U.S. Government actions abroad. The same goes for The US relationship with Israel. “Many policies pursued on Israel’s behalf now jeopardize U.S. national security,” fuelling “anti-Americanism throughout the Arab and Islamic world, thereby increasing the threat from international terrorism…”viii So why then would the US government proceed such actions that would at the same time undermine their own nation’s safety? They must surely know what they are doing. In other words, there must be another explanation, i.e. that these elites were deliberately aiming to create a conflict which they could then manage to create a new world order.


These tactics, as Sutton stated, seem to reveal the practise of Hegelian philosophy. (1) First create a conflict between the “right” and the “left”, between thesis and antithesis; (2) then manage the opposing forces, which is essential to initiate historic change towards a synthesis; and finally this leads to (3) the creation of a new historical situation, a synthesis. Needless to say that masqueraded under the name of democracy, this synthesis which the US government brought about was in reality the furtherance of imperial domination of the US,.ix In the mean time, however, the term New World Order was quickly dropped after it had provoked to many critical questions. Yet, the geopolitical focus of Washington did not change. It simply coined a new term under the Clinton Administration, “globalisation”, which in reality was the “globalisation of American power, consolidated through American banking and finance corporate power.”x

There are numerous cases of “conflict managing,” directed to create a global totalitarian system often termed New World Order. To sum up a far from exhaustive list: (1) According to Sutton the Hegelian dialectic was first put into practise by a secret society named skull & Bones, which was later adopted by the US government. It explains why members of this society have been affiliated with either capitalists or communists and the Nazis. David Rockefeller e.g. “has met regularly with a KGB agent in the United States”…Averell Harriman, carrying out plans to develop Russia, “sneaked an illegal project past the U.S. Government – the list is long.xi Both George W. Bush and John Kerry, republican and democrat, were members of Skull & Bones. (2) Sutton also shows copies of documents that illustrate how members of The Order encouraged Soviet ambitions in the US, or financially supported the Nazis in World War II to gain profit from war, like the Morgan-Rockefeller firm RCA who was associated with the Nazis. Another example is “the Chase Bank, linked to the Order through the Rockefeller family” and other members like Frederick Allen, W.E.S. Griswold, Vanderbilt…”xii (3) Also “The practise of “managing” crises to bring about a favorable outcome, that is, favorable to the elite, is freely admitted in the literature of, for example, The Trilateral Commission.”xiii (4) On a political and military level. Michael Chosso-dovsky noted the existence of an alliance between the U.S. military, the CIA and NATO, who supported Al Qaeda in the Balkan War in the mid-1990s. Washington’s objective being “to trigger ethnic conflict and destabilize the Yugoslav federation…”xiv Moreover, the CIA created Al Qaeda and “supported Pakistani dictator General Zia-Ul Haq in creating thousands of religious schools, from which the germs of the Taliban emerged.” To cover up the fact that “US intelligence apparatus has created its own terrorist organisations, it creates at the same time “its own terrorist warnings concerning the terrorist organisations which it has itself created.”xv Today, Sheldon S. Wolin asserts, we witness how the “amorphous character assigned to the new world of terrorism […] justifies enlarging the power of the avenging state [i.e. the US] both at home and overseas.” In fact, the character of absolute evil which is assigned to terrorism allows “the state to cloak its power in innocence.”xvi But although the American people may be innocent of these crimes, the US Government is definitely not. As Engdahl observed, that “what became clearer in the months after 9-11 was that the attack was clearly used immediately by the Bush Administration, at the very least, as the pretext to launch a war on Islam under the name of a ‘War on Terror’, the ‘Clash of Civilizations,’ which Harvard Professor Samuel Huntington outlined in the early 1990s.”


It raises the question whether the attacks of 9/11 could have been a “False Flag” operation, as many international intelligence experts already began asking? For was it not to create a new and even greater conflict, a new opposing force, Islam, while practising Hegelian Dialectic in the pursuance of the New world Order? Could a small terrorist group as Al Qaeda have done the actions? According to the former president of Germany’s domestic intelligence service such actions need “deathly precision and the magnitude of planning behind the attacks would have needed years of planning…something not found in a “loose group” of terrorists like the one allegedly led by Mohammed Atta while he studied in Hamburg.”xvii In other words, who should be identified as absolute evil here, as today even serious scholars argue that the core of Islam is evil? Still, the main problem of identifying the actual perpetrators is rather complex, especially since Muslim scholars are also starting to acknowledge the ‘hidden dark forces’ of their religion, accepting the creation of a cosmic myth that restrains people from investigating what truly happened.xviii For not only did September 11 become for many people an unambiguous truth that dissolved America’s contradictions and political ambiguities, setting American citizens free, rendering them innocent, but at the same time the 9/11 myth also repressed the people’s critical faculty towards the American Government, which enables them to continue its global strategy.xix Once more it shows who is actually in control, who has the power, and explains why dissident voices of criticism are quickly dismissed by the media as implausible and unpatriotic, as talk of ridiculous conspiracy theorists.

i A.C. Sutton, America’s Secret Establishment An Introduction to the Order of Skull & Bones, p.117Sutton found out that a few early members of the Order of Skull & Bones went to Germany to study Hegelian philosophy, which they, when returning to the United States, put in to practise.

ii W.F. Enghdahl, Full Spectrum dominance Totalitarian Democracy In The New World Order, p.vii

iii A.C. Sutton, Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution, p.51 Like Rockefeller and Morgan, who controlled financial corporations – the National Bank of Commerce and the Chase National Bank, New York Life Insurance, and the Guaranty Trust Company, “American financiers associated with these groups were involved in financing revolution even before 1917.”p. 50

iv A.C. Sutton, Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution, p.17

v C. Quigley, Tragedy & Hope A History of the World in our Time, p.945

vi A.C. Sutton, p. 119

vii W.F. Engdahl, Full Spectrum dominance Totalitarian Democracy In The New World Order, p.5

viii J.J. Mearsheimer and S.M. Walt, The Israel Lobby and US foreign Policy, p.8

ix Ibid., p.9 Contrary to the promise the US had made to Russia not to expand Nato to the east, in 2007 the United States government planned to install advanced missile bases and radar stations in two former Warsaw Pact countries, now Nato members: Poland and the Czech Republic, allegedly, so it was said, to “defend against rogue states like Iran.”

x W.F. Engdahl, A Century of War Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order, p.286

xi A.C. Sutton, America’s Secret Establishment An Introduction to the Order of Skull & Bones, p. 153

xii Ibid., p.171

xiii Ibid., p.viii

xiv M. Chossudovsky, AMERICA’S “WAR ON TERRORISM”,p.xiii

xv Ibid., p.24

xvi S.S. Wolin, Democracy Incorporated Managed Democracy and the Specter of Inverted Totalitarianism, p. 71

xvii W.F. Engdahl, Full Spectrum Dominance Totalitarian Democracy In The New World Order, p.206

xviii See e.g. Reza Aslan’s book How to win a Cosmic War.

xix S.S. Wolin, Democracy Incorporated Managed Democracy and the Specter of Inverted Totalitarianism, p.9

Leave a Reply