By Dennis L. Cuddy, Ph.D.
October 20, 2008
[NOTE: Charlie Rose on his September 16, 2008 PBS program interviewed Bob Woodward regarding his new book THE WAR WITHIN. In researching for the book, Woodward interviewed President Bush and was surprised Bush deliberately avoided words like “victory” or “win” regarding the Iraq war, but rather said we need to “succeed.” Woodward was also surprised that when asking about the decision to change strategies in Iraq, Bush said “there’s no hurry.” Can you imagine a general in World War II deciding to change a failed strategy saying “there’s no hurry”? What Woodward apparently doesn’t realize is that the goal in attacking Iraq was to establish a permanent military presence in the region. With that in mind, saying “succeed” rather than “victory” or “win,” and saying “there’s no hurry” actually makes perfect sense. Shortly after the war began, many Iraqis became suspicious of our motives since we could fire a long-range cruise missile with great precision, but for some reason we couldn’t seem to provide the Iraqis with basic services like electricity. Many people around the world also have a negative attitude toward Americans. We say ours is a government of and by the people, and then we elect leaders who have supported dictators who violently oppress their own people. Why should the oppressed people in those nations like us?
Our “success” in Iraq in large part is due to the Sunni “Awakening,” which is actually our paying (bribing) Sunni militia about $300 a month per man to act as police rather than kill American soldiers. Do you think such an “Awakening” in Afghanistan might reduce opium production? After all, haven’t we paid American farmers billions of dollars not to plant certain crops. Relevant to media bias in the presidential campaign, it was clear from ABC’s George Stephanopoulos (Rhodes scholar) who at the end of the October 7 debate proclaimed Obama as exhibiting Commander-in-Chief qualities, when Obama obviously didn’t understand the need to distinguish between how one deals with adversaries (Obama mentioned Iraq, North Korea and Iran) and a nation one still hopes will be an ally (the question involved uninvited military action in Pakistan). Also regarding the media in the last presidential debate on October 15, moderator Bob Schieffer sat silent as Obama said “all” of McCain’s ads were negative. This was another clear lie that was not identified as such at the time by Schieffer or even McCain himself. If Obama wins the election in early November, don’t be surprised if Israel attacks Iran between then and the date Obama takes office, because Israel may believe it would receive more support for its actions from Bush than from Obama.]
Most people seem confused about the current global economic crisis. How did it happen? Who is to blame? Actually there are people who know exactly what’s going on as well as why and how it happened.
At the front of my book SECRET RECORDS REVEALED (1998), I wrote that on June 28, 1998 THE WASHINGTON POST published an article about the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) titled “At Secret Meetings in Switzerland, 13 People Shape the World’s Economy,” which described these individuals as “this economic cabal… this secretive group… the financial barons who control the world’s supply of money.”
After financial consultant and journalist Joan Veon attended the business meeting of the BIS in June 1998, she wrote in her newsletter that “… the Bank for International Settlements designed the present borderless flow of monies between countries when it pushed for the deregulation (1980) of monetary laws of the major North American, European and Asian countries. By tearing down national financial borders, they created the ability for $1.2 trillion daily to flow around the world (uncontrolled stateless money) looking for the highest interest or fastest currency play.”
On ABC television’s “Nightline” (July 1, 1998), David Turecamo stated concerning certain international investors, that they can “topple politicians with the click of a mouse… who can move huge amounts of money into and out of markets in a nanosecond…. Money knows no allegiance. There is no patriotism.” Host Ted Koppel’s response to that was, “Wouldn’t you know it, when we’re the last remaining superpower, it doesn’t count anymore. Is that what you’re saying?” And Turecamo replied: “That’s it. That’s exactly it.”
That’s what I explained 10 years ago, and over these last years, I’ve warned that the Power Elite (PE) would use an economic (and military) crisis to bring about a World Socialist Government. For example, whether now or five years from now, the PE can hold entire nations’ economies hostage by having huge hedge funds work in concert, driving any commodity or stock price down by selling short in ping-pong fashion (back and forth before the 30-day limit within which one actually has to hold stock in a company).
The World Socialist Government will be a synthesis of Western Capitalism and Eastern Communism, and a useful example of this would be to explain how America and China are becoming more and more alike.
In 1949, the Communists took control of China, and regarding the years 1950 to 1960 Stewart Fraser compiled and edited CHINESE COMMUNIST EDUCATION: RECORDS OF THE FIRST DECADE, in which one finds “Education Must Be Combined With Productive Labor” by Lu Ting-yi who stated: “Now this combination of schooling with productive labor has given rise to the campaign to reform school curricula and the efforts to change school systems…. Our education is… Socialist education…. Education must serve politics, must be combined with productive labor…. The combination of education with productive labor is required by our country’s Socialist revolution and Socialist construction by the great goal of building a Communist society…. The purpose of the training is unified, that is, to train Socialist-minded, educated workers.”
Including the 1950s and 1960s, Theodore Chen in COMMUNIST CHINA, 1949-1969, explained: “The primary concern of education is not the acquisition of knowledge, but the remolding of behavior, attitudes, emotions and thoughts.”
And regarding the years 1969 to 1976, Jonathan Unger in EDUCATION UNDER MAO related that “schools were to teach concepts that were relevant to industrial and agricultural work.” The next year (1977), the top federal education official for the U.S., Mary Berry, toured China and delivered a speech titled “The Chinese Experience in Education: What America Stands To Learn” on November 17 at the University of Illinois, stating that she saw “nearly complete unity between education and labor – so complete that activities came to seem a basic, natural part of life, as they should be.” She continued to reveal that the U.S. Office of Education was developing Lifelong Learning programs modeled after the Chinese Communist programs, and she expected these programs to meet the “needs for intellectual fulfillment and social growth. It is here that the Chinese have set the pattern for the world to follow, and it’s here that American higher education may have it its last, best opportunity for growth.”
With the beginning of the 1980s, American business was becoming increasingly concerned that it would not have enough skilled workers to compete in the “global economy” it was promoting. Thus, there began a significant promotion of School-to-Work (STW) which I described in an earlier article. The STW promotion was largely led by the Carnegie-supported National Center on Education and the Economy, with board members like Hillary Clinton and David Rockefeller, Jr.
Relevant to this effort, in 1983 Howard Gardner wrote FRAMES OF MIND: THE THEORY OF MULTIPLE INTELLIGENCES, in which he concluded: “Ultimately, the educational plans that are pursued need to be orchestrated across various interest groups of the society so they can, taken together, help the society to achieve its larger goals. Individual profiles must be considered in the light of goals pursued by the wider society; and sometimes, in fact, individuals with gifts in certain directions must nonetheless be guided along other, less favored paths, simply because the needs of the culture are particularly urgent in that realm at that time.”
In China, each person has such a profile called a “dangan” and in the U.S. students have academic profiles as well. In China, its Communist dictators can literally force people into certain occupations desired by its rulers. In the U.S. under STW, a girl in Las Vegas schools who wanted to be a veterinarian was advised that she should be educated for a career in a casino because that’s what Las Vegas needed!
That China was used as a model for American education not only was displayed by Mary Berry’s 1977 remarks, but in 1989 Howard Gardner authored TO OPEN MINDS: CHINESE CLUES TO THE DILEMNA OF CONTEMPORARY EDUCATION.
In the decade of the 1990s, the first annual China-U.S. Conference on Education was held in Beijing in July 1997 with featured keynote speakers including Mary Futrell (former NEA president) and Carolyn Warner (former superintendent of Arizona’s Department of Public Instruction and on the 1990s GOALS 2000 National Skill Standards Board), who has opined that “those who educate are more to be honored than those who bear the children. The latter gave them only life, the former teach them the arts of living.” The annual China-U.S. conferences continued July 14-18, 1998 with the theme “Four Qualities for the New Millennium.” At the same time, the Beijing Institute of Education and Global Interactions (Phoenix, Arizona) promoted school partnerships between the U.S. and China. The conferences continued into the 21st century with topics covering educational leaders, the community colleges, and women’s issues. In 2005, a conference picked up on Howard Gardner’s theme of “multiple intelligences,” and in 2007 the conference was on literacy.
The Power Elite’s synthesis of America and China has American students increasingly being trained for productive labor (part of Marx’s COMMUNIST MANIFESTO), while China is adopting certain free market principles (Shanghai is looking more and more Western) and its cities and schools are increasingly emphasizing the American concept of specialization (Shengzhou produces half the world’s neckties). There is no way American students taking perhaps two or three specialized courses (e.g., Welding I, II, III) in high school can hope to compete with Chinese students who have many more years of specialized education, and who work for much lower wages after they graduate. This is perhaps why a city like Shenzhen with 12.4 million people already has 100,000 factories producing a majority of the world’s laptops, cell phones, jeans, etc. There is no way Americans can compete with this, that is, unless we become more and more like the Chinese, living in what will become “The People’s Republic of America.” And once all the nations of the world are synthesized like this, the Power Elite will have achieved its goal of a World Socialist Government.
The process has worked like this. First, Fascist elements were introduced with government and corporations working in tandem. This was done so that corporations could become transnational, investing heavily (and transferring jobs) elsewhere. Once the global economic system was in place, the current economic crisis could drive corporations’ stocks down and devalue currencies resulting in a demand (reported October 10, 2008) for a “global solution” to the problem. Remember in my March 24, 2008 NewsWithViews column, I wrote about “the Power Elite’s plan to create a global economic crisis (greatly devalued currencies, stocks, bonds, etc.)… This will result in the world’s population submitting to the Power Elite’s ‘International Planning’ (for International Socialism) whereby they will manage the world’s (and each nation’s) economy. The political structure they will form to do that will be a World Socialist Government.” The “global solution” could also involve the introduction of a global currency (the Phoenix) pictured on the cover of THE ECONOMIST twenty years ago (January 9, 1988). The Phoenix was forecast for A.D. 2018, but remember that H.G. Wells in EXPERIMENT IN AUTOBIOGRAPHY (1934) said the “planned world-state” would be an “Open Conspiracy” in the form of “liberal socialism,” and that when “finally precipitated, its coming is likely to happen very quickly.” Five years before this, the stock market crashed in 1929 in part due to “large-scale corporate thimble-rigging” (corporations holding securities in other corporations in a pyramidal manner), according to John Kenneth Galbraith who identified Goldman Sachs (GS) as one of the participants in the 1920s.
Relevant to the current crisis, it’s interesting to note that current Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson was CEO of GS, and President Clinton’s Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin was co-chairman of GS. Also, formerly with GS are current White House Chief of State Joshua Bolton, Treasury Undersecretary Ken Wilson, former Bush administration Treasury Undersecretary Robert Steel (who in July 2008 became Wachovia’s CEO until it collapsed), and Bush’s second cousin George Herbert Walker IV (global head of investment management at Lehman Brothers when it recently collapsed).
In addition to dozens of Rhodes scholars having been with GS, so was the current World Bank president Robert Zoellick. As head of the World Bank, he is at strategic position regarding the global financial crisis we have today. In case you think this is purely coincidental, note the following strategic positions Zoellick “just happened” to hold over the past quarter century. In the 1980s, he led the NAFTA negotiations and was President Reagan’s Deputy Chief of Staff 1985-1988. Toward the end of President George H.W. Bush’s term, Zoellick was White House Deputy Chief of Staff and Counselor to Treasury Secretary James Baker. From 1993 to 1997, he was Executive Vice-President of Fannie Mae (supervising the affordable housing division). Zoellick then became Senior International Advisor to GS. From 2001 to 2005 he was U.S. Trade Representative, and in 2005 he became Deputy Secretary of State where he was the architect of the administration’s China policy. In 2006-2007, he was Vice-Chairman of GS.
Today, governments have nationalized banks and have taken over mortgage giants like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as well as transnational giants like American International Group. This is the movement from Fascism to Socialism. As the headline on the London DAILY TELEGRAPH (October 9, 2008) stated, “Financial Crisis: We’re All Socialists Now, Comrade.” Remember that the movement toward American Socialism was described in Robert Hugh Benson’s LORD OF THE WORLD published in 1907, and it foretold “the final scheme of Western Free Trade” would begin after 1989 as part of that movement. Senator McCain’s participation in this “final scheme” can be seen by his repeated opposition to “buy American” requirements in federal law as being “gross examples of protective trade policies.”The reason the Power Elite ultimately wants a Socialist World Government rather than a Fascist one is that the Power Elite wants complete control rather than sharing power with corporate heads. And the person best able to lead America into its Socialist future is Senator Obama. Perhaps that’s why Senator McCain on October 10, 2008 shocked a crowd of supporters urging him to fight on when he told them Obama is a decent person whom they don’t have to be afraid of as President. Why would McCain say that about someone who is pro-abortion rights and who has dangerous economic and foreign policy positions? Maybe McCain secretly has decided that, with the current seemingly intractable economic crisis, the next president will have a disastrous four years and McCain would rather that be Obama than himself! One might even imagine a Saturday Night Live opening skit where each candidate, faced with the prospect of interminable problems as president, tries to persuade the public to vote for his opponent!
Of course, the Power Elite actually controls events and who will be elected President. And if it’s Obama, that would explain why McCain doesn’t even use what could be a winning issue – abortion funding! While polls show the public is divided on whether to make all abortions illegal, the public overwhelmingly opposes government funding of elective abortions which Obama supports. Just like Obama says government shouldn’t impose any particular morality on women concerning their choice for abortions, the public overwhelmingly believes Obama shouldn’t impose his abortion-funding morality upon taxpayers religiously opposed to this killing of innocent babies. Why do you think McCain never uses this as an issue? Think about it.
© 2008 Dennis Cuddy - All Rights Reserved