ROCKEFELLER

This eye-opening and extensively researched book describes the impact of Rockefeller philanthropy on public policy, especially in relation to the weaponisation of climate change as leverage towards centralised world government. The original Rockefeller Foundation was set up in 1913 partly as a way of avoiding tax (and thereby converting economic wealth into political power), with the stated mission to ‘promote the well-being of humanity throughout the world’ – which sounds admirable enough. The author meticulously documents how the family that made its fortune in oil has been funding environmental and climate research since the 1950s, helping shape through a multitude of organisations and initiatives climate policy measures since the 1980s, and supporting climate activism since the 1990s. Their wealth has enabled them to ‘anchor the climate issue both scientifically and politically.’ The grand strategy pursued for over 100 years is technocratic world government through the UN – the family helped found and fund the League of Nations and the UN, as well as the Council for Foreign Relations in 1921, the World Bank in 1944, the Conservation Foundation in 1948, the Bilderberg Group in 1954, the International Meteorological Institute in 1955 and the Trilateral Commission in 1973. The family also founded, financed and organised the European Commission, OPEC, 350.org, the IPCC, and the UN Development Program along with literally hundreds of environmental organisations, initiatives and conferences.

And as Elizabeth Nickson explains in her comprehensive Substack Article (https://elizabethnickson.substack.com/p/the-rockefellers-created-990-climate) ‘Laurance Rockefeller was purposed with the spiritual arm of the operation. Starting in the late 40’s, Laurance founded fifty environmental organisations including the World Wildlife Federation, the World Resource Foundation, the IUCN, and UNESCO. Laurence was behind Esalen Institute and Lindisfarne Association, and is responsible for coining the term “New Age.” He founded and funded the Fund for the Advancement of the Human Spirit, the Foundation for Conscious Evolution, the Conservation Foundation.’ The aim here was the fostering of global and planetary consciousness corresponding to the family’s overall political and economic objectives. These also involved the development and support of modern pharmaceutical medicine, family-planning and population control, industrial agriculture, modern art and architecture, behavioural science, information technology, and politics. Few people are aware of this consciousness connection within the web of interlocking interests. Indeed, I myself support the fostering of planetary consciousness, but crucially in tandem with a sacred and spiritual rather than transhumanist understanding of the human being that focuses on technological upgrades rather than inner transformation.

Nordangard argues that the larger scheme involves ‘the plan to consolidate power on a worldwide scale and creating a world with the more effective global governance system, Smart Globalisation. A technocratic world where the interdependent parts relinquish their sovereignty to serve the wider community under a planetary-wide institutional management and where the world (man, economy and ecology) is united into a technologically interconnected and synchronised whole - the cybernetic world organism’ (p. xii) involving strict conformity/obedience/uniformity and a digital enslavement of us as ‘hackable animals.’ Contrast this with the ideal - based on Love rather than Power and Dominance - of the Bulgarian sage Peter Deunov that humans should be free and serve Love, Wisdom and Truth. And as Riane Eisler would put it, smart globalisation is still a form of patriarchal dominator rather than partnership society.

The success of the operation is clear, but what this book reveals are the tactics of secrecy, deceit, manipulation and control. The funding of a huge number of ostensibly independent and unconnected foundations, institutes, NGOs, initiatives and think tanks gives the impression of independence and a wide interest in and support for Rockefeller ideas, but these are coordinated and controlled through loyal agents on boards of directors and informal but powerful behind-the-scenes networks in international politics. Moreover, activists are funded – some as controlled opposition - to spark public debate and arrange apparently independent demonstrations, while media campaigns are orchestrated and carefully crafted to anchor the impression of serious threats; in addition, triggering events are employed to influence policymakers (p. 324) This fulfils Brzezinski’s forecast from 1970 that ‘Unhindered by the restraints of traditional liberal values, this elite would not hesitate to achieve its political ends by using the latest modern techniques for influencing public behaviour and keeping society under close surveillance and control.’ The widespread co-ordination of tech censorship of ideas and people not on the Rockefeller page in matters of climate and health is indicative of the current extent of media narrative control.

As far back as 1947, atomic physicist Edwin Rabinowitch as editor of Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, wrote: ‘If the world government cause is to triumph it will need more than sympathetic endorsement by the majority. People must be made to feel that their own security, freedom, and prosperity, yes, their own survival, depend on the creation in our time, of a world rule of law. They must be made to believe that the establishment of a World Government is more urgent than the maintenance of a high domestic standard and as, if not more, practical than the pursuit of a deceptive security by full military preparedness.’ (p. 44)

Most thinking people would agree that we are as a species evolving towards unity, but the crucial question is whether this is, as Lewis Mumford put it, mechanical uniformity or unity in diversity. What we have seen over the last few years is a strong emphasis on enforced mechanical uniformity, while natural systems are inherently diverse and self-organising. Mechanical uniformity demands fascist managerial autocracy and authoritarianism with a view to total control and surveillance, while democracy is represented by unity in diversity, also recognising freedom both inner and outer. Orchestrated chaos and artificial divisions are designed to push us towards the proposed solutions (representing Fourth Industrial Revolution ‘advancement’) of digitised technocracy involving mass surveillance through facial recognition, social engineering through social credits, forced conformity, propaganda and censorship, brain implants, and ‘predictive’ policing.

Due to popular uprisings, the Berlin Wall came down in 1989 and Eastern Europe was liberated from Communist totalitarianism. The danger now is a civilisational regress (see my review of Edgar Morin below) towards a barbaric digital totalitarianism in the name of security and inaugurated through the manipulative propaganda of fear. We all have a duty to be aware, informed and vigilant while working towards more decentralised systems based on an evolutionary spiritual awakening to Oneness, Love and Wisdom, permeated by the spirit of the Divine Feminine and a renewed sense of the sacred, also with respect to the Earth. Jacob Nordangard’s important study represents a diagnostic wake-up call to the imminent dangers we face, but it falls short of articulating a truly humane vision of our planetary future.