"Growing interdependence is a fact of life of the contemporary world. It
transcends and influences national systems... To be effective in meeting common
problems, Japan, Western Europe, and North America will have to consult and
cooperate more closely, on the basis of equality, to develop and carry out
coordinated policies on matters affecting their common interests... refrain from
unilateral actions incompatible with their interdependence and from actions
detrimental to other regions... [and] take advantage of existing international and
regional organizations and further enhance their role. The Commission hopes to
play a creative role as a channel of free exchange of opinions with other
countries and regions. Further progress of the developing countries and greater
improvement of East-West relations will be a major concern.”
Yet critics have been quick to point out that this “fostering of
interdependence” has done little to ameliorate fundamental disparities of
exchange, but has exacerbated existing crises of common interest; in certain
cases manipulating them to suit their own agendas. One early critic was former
Senator Barry Goldwater, who suggested it was a “
coordinated attempt to seize
control and consolidate the four centers of power: political, monetary,
intellectual and ecclesiastical in the creation of an economic world power
superior to the political governments of the nation-states involved.
” While from
the opposite end of the political spectrum, leading Leftist semiotician
Noam
Chomsky implies that the Commission is “
concerned with trying to induce what
they call ‘more moderation in democracy’; turning people back to passivity and
obedience so they don’t put so many constraints on state power
.”
Yet it was up to the aforementioned Rockefeller—along
with Trilateral co-
founder Zbigniew Brzezinski—to effectively select and choose the several
hundred leading minds of finance and industry to serve on the initial committee;
essentially ensuring that the global financial interests of the Rockefeller empire
would be best served by its committee members. And it was largely their joint
ploy that helped elect then-Georgia Governor Jimmy Carter the presidential seat
in 1976. And given the Rockefeller’s vested personal portfolio of real estate
investments in Atlanta was estimated to be in the $5 Billion range during the
1970s alone, is it any wonder that Atlanta was known as the “Rockefeller Center
of the South?”
Yet money alone isn’t sufficient to sway the minds of a general populace.
The collective human experience shows us that there must be a concrete series of
organizing principles and guidelines—no matter how absurd or irrational—in
order to develop (or perhaps more appropriately,
suggest
) the approval or
disapproval of a mass population. So before you read the following words of
Trilateral Commission co-founder and former National Security Advisor for
President Carter Zbigniew Brzezinski (from his 1970 opus
Between Two Ages
,)
you may want to keep an open mind about the previous section’s description of
synarchy:
“In the absence of social consensus society's emotional and rational needs
may be fused -- mass media makes this easier to achieve -- in the person of an
individual who is seen as...making the necessary innovations in the social order.
“Such a society would be dominated by an elite whose claim to political
power would rest on allegedly superior scientific know-how. Unhindered by the
restraints of traditional liberal values, this elite would not hesitate to achieve its
political ends by the latest modern techniques for influencing public behavior
and keeping society under close surveillance and control.
“Though Stalinism may have been a needless tragedy for both the Russian
people and communism as an ideal, there is the intellectually tantalizing
possibility that for the world at large it was, as we shall see, a blessing in
disguise.”
Which can be compared with the statements of Rockefeller himself after his
1973 visit to the People’s Republic of China:
“The social experiment of China under Chairman Mao's leadership is one of
the most important and successful in human history."
(New York Times
, "From a
China Traveler," August 10, 1973)
“... the family unit is broken up...The
children are taken away from the parents and placed in government-run
nurseries...The parents may see their children once a week and when they see
them they cannot show affection toward the children. The idea is to have the
children and the family sever their affection and direct it toward the state.
Names are taken away from the children and they are given numbers. There is
no individual identity... The commune system is destroying morality in Red
China: There is no morality because the love of the family is taken away. There
is no honesty and respect among men or between men. There is no human
dignity: they are all like animals. There is no guilt associated with murder of
individuals for the improvement of the state…”
Both of which may shed an entirely new light on the proposition of “fostering
interdependence between nations.”
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: 
