Capitalists as Enemies of Capitalism
Businessmen or manufacturers can either be
genuine free enterprisers or statists; they can either make their way on
the free market or seek special government favors and privileges. They
choose according to their individual preferences and values. But
bankers are inherently inclined toward statism.
Commercial bankers, engaged as they are in
unsound fractional reserve credit, are, in the free market, always
teetering on the edge of bankruptcy. Hence they are always reaching for
government aid and bailout.
Investment bankers do much of their business
underwriting government bonds, in the United States and abroad. Therefore,
they have a vested interest in promoting deficits and in forcing taxpayers to
redeem government debt. Both sets of bankers, then, tend to be tied in
with government policy, and try to influence and control government
actions in domestic and foreign affairs.
In the early years of the 19th century, the
organized capital market in the United States was largely confined to
government bonds (then called “stocks”), along with canal companies and
banks themselves. Whatever investment banking existed was
therefore concentrated in government debt. From the Civil War until
the 1890s, there were virtually no manufacturing corporations;
manufacturing and other businesses were partnerships and had not yet
reached the size where they needed to adopt the corporate form. The only
exception was railroads, the biggest industry in the U.S. The first
investment banks, therefore, were concentrated in railroad securities and
government bonds.
The first major investment-banking house in the
United States was a creature of government privilege. Jay Cooke, an
Ohio-born business promoter living in Philadelphia, and his brother
Henry, editor of the leading Republican newspaper in Ohio, were
close friends of Ohio U.S. Senator Salmon P. Chase. When the new
Lincoln Administration took over in 1861, the Cookes lobbied hard
to secure Chase the appointment of Secretary of the Treasury. That lobbying,
plus the then enormous sum of $100,000 that Jay Cooke poured into Chase's
political coffers, induced Chase to return the favor by granting Cooke,
newly set up as an investment banker, an enormously lucrative monopoly in
underwriting the entire federal debt.
Cooke and Chase then managed to use the virtual
Republican monopoly in Congress during the war to transform the American
commercial banking system from a relatively free market to a National
Banking System centralized by the federal government under Wall Street control.
A crucial aspect of that system was that national banks could only expand
credit in proportion to the federal bonds they owned – bonds which they
were forced to buy from Jay Cooke.
Jay Cooke & Co. proved enormously influential
in the post-war Republican administrations, which continued their monopoly
in under-writing government bonds. The House of Cooke met its
well-deserved fate by going bankrupt in the Panic of 1874, a failure
helped along by its great rival, the then Philadelphia-based
Drexel, Morgan & Co.
J.P. Morgan
After 1873,
Drexel, Morgan and its dominant figure J.P. Morgan became by far the
leading investment firm in the U.S. If Cooke had been a "Republican"
bank, Morgan, while prudently well connected in both parties, was chiefly
influential among the Democrats. The other great financial interest
powerful in the Democratic Party was the mighty European
investment-banking house of the Rothschilds, whose agent, August Belmont,
was treasurer of the national Democratic party for many years.
The enormous influence of the Morgans on the
Democratic administrations of Grover Cleveland (1884–88, 1892–96) may be
seen by simply glancing at their leading personnel. Grover
Cleveland himself spent virtually all his life in the Morgan ambit.
He grew up in Buffalo as a railroad lawyer, one of his major
clients being the Morgan-dominated New York Central Railroad. In
between administrations, he became a partner of the powerful New
York City law firm of Bangs, Stetson, Tracey, and MacVeagh.
This firm, by the late 1880s, had become the chief legal firm of the
House of Morgan, largely because senior partner Charles B. Tracey was J.P.
Morgan’s brother-in-law. After Tracey died in 1887, Francis Lynde Stetson,
an old and close friend of Cleveland’s, became the firm’s dominant
partner, as well as the personal attorney for J.P. Morgan. (This is now
the Wall St. firm of Davis, Polk, and Wardwell.)
Grover Cleveland’s cabinets were honeycombed with
Morgan men, with an occasional bow to other bankers. Considering those
officials most concerned with foreign policy, his first Secretary of
State, Thomas F. Bayard, was a close ally and disciple of August Belmont; indeed,
Belmont’s son, Perry, had lived with and worked for Bayard in Congress as
his top aide. The dominant Secretary of State in the second Cleveland
Administration was the powerful Richard Olney, a leading lawyer for Boston
financial interests, who have always been tied in with the Morgans, and in
particular was on the Board of the Morgan-run Boston and Maine
Railroad, and would later help Morgan organize the General Electric
Company.
The War and Navy departments under Cleveland were
equally banker-dominated. Boston Brahmin Secretary of War William C.
Endicott had married into the wealthy Peabody family. Endicott's wife's
uncle, George Peabody, had established a banking firm which included
J.P.Morgan's father as a senior partner; and a Peabody had been best man
at J.P.'s wedding. Secretary of the Navy was leading New York City
financier William C. Whitney, a close friend and top political advisor of
Cleveland's. Whitney was closely allied with the Morgans in running the
New York Central Railroad.
Secretary of War in the second Cleveland
Administration was an old friend and aide of Cleveland's, Daniel S.
Lamont, previously an employee and protégé of William C. Whitney. Finally,
the second Secretary of the Navy was an Alabama Congressman,
Hilary A. Herbert, an attorney for and very close friend of Mayer
Lehman, a founding partner of the New York mercantile firm of
Lehman Brothers, soon to move heavily into investment banking. Indeed, Mayer's
son, Herbert, later to be Governor of New York during the New Deal, was
named after Hilary Herbert.
The great turning point of American foreign
policy came in the early 1890s, during the second Cleveland
Administration. It was then that the U.S. turned sharply and permanently
from a foreign policy of peace and non-intervention to an aggressive
program of economic and political expansion abroad. At the heart
of the new policy were America's leading bankers, eager to use the
country's growing economic strength to subsidize and force-feed export markets
and investment outlets that they would finance, as well as to guarantee
Third World government bonds. The major focus of aggressive expansion in
the 1890s was Latin America, and the principal Enemy to be dislodged was
Great Britain, which had dominated foreign investments in that vast
region.
In a notable series of articles in 1894, Bankers’
Magazine set the agenda for the remainder of the decade. Its
conclusion: if “we could wrest the South American markets from Germany
and England and permanently hold them, this would be indeed a
conquest worth perhaps a heavy sacrifice.”
Long-time Morgan associate Richard Olney heeded
the call, as Secretary of State from 1895 to 1897, setting the U.S. on the
road to Empire. After leaving the State Department, he publicly
summarized the policy he had pursued. The old isolationism heralded
by George Washington’s Farewell Address is over, he thundered. The
time has now arrived, Olney declared, when “it behooves us to accept the
commanding position… among the Power of the earth.” And, “the present crying
need of our commercial interests,” he added, “is more markets and larger
markets” for American products, especially in Latin America.
Good as their word, Cleveland and Olney proceeded
belligerently to use U.S. might to push Great Britain out of its markets
and footholds in Latin America. In 1894, the United States
Navy illegally used force to break the blockade of Rio de Janeiro by
a British-backed rebellion aiming to restore the Brazilian monarchy. To
insure that the rebellion was broken, the U.S.Navy stationed war-ships in Rio
harbor for several months.
During the same period, the U.S. government faced
a complicated situation in Nicaragua, where it was planning to guarantee
the bonds of the American Maritime Canal Company, to build a canal
across the country. The new regime of General Zelaya was
threatening to revoke this canal concession; at the same time, an
independent reservation, of Mosquito Indians, protected for decades by
Great Britain, sat athwart the eastern end of the proposed canal. In
a series of deft maneuvers, using the Navy and landing the Marines, the
U.S. managed to bring Zelaya to heel and to oust the British and take over
the Mosquito territory.
In Santo Domingo (now the Dominican Republic)
France was the recipient of the American big stick. In the Santo Domingo
Improvement Company, in 1893, a consortium of New York bankers
purchased the entire debt of Santo Domingo from a Dutch company,
receiving the right to collect all Dominican customs revenues in
payment of the debt. The French became edgy the following year when a
French citizen was murdered in that country, and the French government
threatened to use force to obtain reparations. Its target for reparations
was the Dominican customs revenue, at which point the U.S. sent a warship
to the area to intimidate the French.
But the most alarming crisis of this period took
place in 1895–96, when the U.S. was at a hair's breadth from actual war
with Great Britain over a territorial dispute between Venezuela and British
Guiana. This boundary dispute had been raging for forty years, but
Venezuela shrewdly attracted American interest by granting concessions to
Americans in gold fields in the disputed area.
Apparently, Cleveland had had enough of the
"British threat," and he moved quickly toward war. His close
friend Don Dickinson, head of the Michigan Democratic Party, delivered a
bellicose speech in May 1895 as a surrogate for the President. Wars
are inevitable, Dickinson declared, for they arise out of commercial competition
between nations. The United States faces the danger of numerous conflicts,
and clearly the enemy was Great Britain. After reviewing the history of
the alleged British threat, Dickinson thundered that "we need and must
have open markets throughout the world to maintain and increase our
prosperity."
In July, Secretary of State Olney sent the
British an insulting and tub-thumping note, declaring that “the United
States is practically sovereign on this continent, and its fiat is law upon
the subjects to which it confines its interposition.” President Cleveland,
angry at the British rejection of the note, delivered a virtual war
message to Congress in December, but Britain, newly occupied in problems
with the Boers in South Africa, decided to yield and agree to a compromise
boundary settlement. Insultingly, the Venezuelans received not a single
seat on the agreed-upon arbitration commission.
In effect, the British, occupied elsewhere, had
ceded dominance to the United States in Latin America. It was time for the
U.S. to find more enemies to challenge.
The next, and greatest, Latin American
intervention was of course in Cuba, where a Republican Administration
entered the war goaded by its jingo wing closely allied to the Morgan
interests, led by young Assistant Secretary of the Navy Theodore
Roosevelt and by his powerful Boston Brahmin mentor, Senator Henry
Cabot Lodge. But American intervention in Cuba had begun in the
Cleveland-Olney regime.
In February 1895, a rebellion for Cuban
independence broke out against Spain. The original U.S. response was to
try to end the threat of revolutionary war to American property interests by
siding with Spanish rule modified by autonomy to the Cubans to pacify
their desires for independence. Here was the harbinger of U.S. foreign
policy ever since: to try to maneuver in Third World countries to sponsor
“third force” or “moderate” interests which do not really exist. The great
proponent of this policy was the millionaire sugar grower in Cuba, Edwin
F. Atkins, a close friend of fellow-Bostonian Richard Olney, and a
partner of J.P. Morgan and Company.
By the fall of 1895, Olney concluded that Spain
could not win, and that, in view of the “large and important
commerce between the two countries” and the “large amounts of American capital”
in Cuba, the U.S. should execute a 180-degree shift and back the rebels,
even unto recognizing Cuban independence. The fact that such recognition
would certainly lead to war with Spain did not seem worth noting. The road
to war with Spain had begun, a road that would reach its logical
conclusion three years later.
Ardently backing the pro-war course was Edwin F.
Atkins, and August Belmont, on behalf of the Rothschild banking interests.
The House’ of Rothschild, which had been long-time financiers to Spain,
refused to extend any further credit to Spain, and instead under-wrote Cuban
Revolutionary bond issues, and even assumed full obligation for the
unsubscribed balance.
During the conquest of Cuba in the
Spanish-American War, the United States also took the occasion to expand
its power greatly in Asia, seizing first the port of Manila and then all
of the Philippines, after which it spent several years crushing the
revolutionary forces of the Philippine independence movement.
An Aggressive Asian Policy
The late 1890s also saw a new turn in the United
States’ attitude toward the Far East. Expanding rapidly into the Pacific
in pursuit of economic and financial gain, the U.S. government saw
that Russia, Germany, and France had been carving up increasing
territorial and economic concessions in the near corpse of the Chinese
imperial dynasty. Coming late in the imperial game of Asia, and not
willing to risk large-scale expenditure of troops, the U.S., led
by Olney and continued by the Republicans, decided to link up with Great
Britain. The two countries would then use the Japanese to provide the
shock troops that would roll back Russia and Germany and parcel out
imperial benefits to both of her faraway allies, in a division of spoils
known euphemistically as the “Open Door.” With Britain leaving the field
free to the U.S. in Latin America, the U.S. could afford to link arms in
friendly fashion with Britain in the Far East.
A major impetus toward a more aggressive policy
in Asia was provided by the lure of railroad concessions. Lobbying heavily
for railroad concessions was the American China Development Company,
organized in 1895, and consisting of a consortium of the top
financial interests in the U.S., including James Stillman of the then Rockefeller-controlled
National City Bank; Charles Coster, railroad expert of J.P. Morgan and
Co.; Jacob Schiff, head of the New York investment bank of Kuhn, Loeb and
Co.; and Edward H. Harriman, railroad magnate. Olney and the State
Department pressed China hard for concessions to the ACDC for a
Peking-Hankow Railway and for a railway across Manchuria, but in both
cases the American syndicate was blocked. Russia pressured China successfully
to grant that country the right to build a Manchurian railway; and a
Belgian syndicate, backed by France and Russia, won the Peking-Hankow
concession from China.
It was time for sterner measures. The attorney
for the ACDC set up the Committee on American Interests in China, which
soon transformed itself into the American Asiatic Association,
dedicated to a more aggressive American policy on behalf of economic
interestsin China. After helping the European powers suppress the
nationalist Boxer Rebellion in China in 1900, the U.S. also helped
push Russian troops out of Manchuria. Finally, in 1904,
President Theodore Roosevelt egged Japan on to attack Russia, and
Japan succeeded in driving Russia out of Manchuria and ending
Russia’s economic concessions. Roosevelt readily acceded to Japan’s
resulting dominance in Korea and Manchuria, hoping that Japan would
also protect American economic interests in the area.
Theodore Roosevelt had been a Morgan man from the
beginning of his career. His father and uncle were both Wall Street
bankers, both of them closely associated with various Morgan-dominated railroads. Roosevelt’s
first cousin and major financial adviser, W. Emlen Roosevelt, was on the board
of several New York banks, including the Astor National Bank, the
president of which was George F. Baker, close friend and ally of J.P.
Morgan and head of Morgan’s flagship commercial bank, the First National
Bank of New York.’ At Harvard, furthermore, young Theodore married Alice
Lee, daughter of George Cabot Lee, and related to the top Boston Brahmin
families. Kinsman Henry Cabot Lodge soon became T.R.’s long-time
political mentor.
Throughout the 19th century, the Republicans had
been mainly a high-tariff, inflationist party, while the Democrats had
been the party of free trade and hard money, i.e., the gold standard. In
1896, however, the radical inflationist forces headed by William
Jennings Bryan captured the Democratic presidential nomination, and
so the Morgans, previously dominant in the Democratic Party, sent a
message to the Republican nominee, William McKinley, through Henry Cabot
Lodge. Lodge stated that the Morgan interests would back McKinley provided
that the Republicans would support the gold standard. The deal was struck.
William McKinley reflected the dominance of the
Republican Party by the Rockefeller/Standard Oil interests. Standard Oil
was originally headquartered at Rockefeller’s home in Cleveland, and the
oil magnate had long had a commanding influence in Ohio
Republican politics. In the early 1890s, Marcus Hanna, industrialist
and high school chum of John D. Rockefeller, banded together with Rockefeller
and other financiers to save McKinley from bankruptcy, and Hanna became
McKinley’s top political adviser and chairman of the Republican National
Committee. As a consolation prize to the Morgan interests for McKinley’s
capture of the Republican nomination, Morgan man Garret A. Hobart,
director of various Morgan companies, including the Liberty National Bank
of New York City, became Vice-President.
The death of Hobart in 1899 left a “Morgan
vacancy” in the Vice-Presidential spot, as McKinley walked into the
nomination. McKinley and Hanna were both hostile to Roosevelt, considering
him “erratic” and a “Madman,” but after several Morgan men turned down the
nomination, and after the intensive lobbying of Morgan partner George W. Perkins,
Teddy Roosevelt at last received the Vice-Presidential nomination. It is
not surprising that virtually Teddy’s first act after the election of 1900
was to throw a lavish dinner in honor of J.P. Morgan.
Teddy Roosevelt and the “Lone Nut”
The sudden appearance of one of the “lone nuts”
so common in American political history led to the assassination of
McKinley, and suddenly Morgan man Theodore Roosevelt was President. John
Hay, expansionist Secretary of State whom Roosevelt inherited from McKinley,
had the good fortune of having his daughter marry the son of William C.
Whitney of the great Morgan-connected family. TR’s next Secretary of State
and former Secretary of War was his old friend Elihu Root, personal attorney
for J.P. Morgan. Root appointed as his Assistant Secretary a close
friend of TR’s, Robert Bacon, a Morgan partner, and in due course
Bacon became TR’s Secretary of State. TR’s first appointed
Secretary of the Navy was Paul Morton, vice-president of the
Morgan-controlled Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railroad, and his
Assistant Secretary was Herbert L. Satterlee, who had the distinction of
being J.P.Morgan’s son-in-law.
Theodore Roosevelt’s greatest direct boost to the
Morgan interests is little known. It is well known that Roosevelt
engineered a phony revolution in Columbia in 1903, creating the new state
of Panama and handing the Canal Zone to the United States. What has
not been fully disclosed is who benefited from the $40 million
that the U.S. government paid, as part of the Panama settlement, to
the owners of the old bankrupt Panama Canal Company, a French company which had
previously been granted a Colombian concession to dig a Panama canal.
The Panama Canal Company’s lobbyist,
Morgan-connected New York attorney William Nelson Cromwell, literally sat
in the White House directing the “revolution” and organizing the final
settlement. We now know that, in 1900, the shares of the old French Panama
Canal Company were purchased by an American financial syndicate, headed by
J.P. Morgan & Co., and put together by Morgan’s top attorney, Francis
Lynde Stetson. The syndicate also included members of the Rockefeller,
Seligman, and Kuhn, Loeb financial groups, as well as Perkins and
Saterlee.
The syndicate did well from the Panama
revolution, purchasing the shares at two-thirds of par and selling them,
after the revolution, for double the price. One member of the syndicate
was especially fortunate: Teddy Roosevelt’s brother-in-law, Douglas E.
Robinson, a director of Morgan’s Astor National Bank. For William
Cromwell was named the fiscal agent of the new Republic of Panama,
and Cromwell promptly put $6 million of the $10 million payoff
the U.S. made to the Panamanian revolutionaries into New York
City mortgages via the real estate firm of the same Douglas E. Robinson.
After the turn of the century, a savage economic
and political war developed between the Morgan interests on the one hand,
and the allied Harriman-Kuhn, Loeb-Rockefeller interests on
the other. Harriman and Kuhn, Loeb grabbed control of the
Union Pacific Railroad and the two titanic forces battled to a
draw for control of the Northern Pacific. Also, at about the
same time, a long-lasting and world-wide financial and political “oil
war” broke out between Standard Oil, previously a monopolist in both the
crude and export markets outside of the U.S., and the burgeoning British
Royal Dutch Shell–Rothschild combine.
And since the Morgans and Rothschilds were
longtime allies, it is certainly sensible to conclude – though there are
no hard facts to prove it – that Teddy Roosevelt launched his
savage anti-trust assault to break Standard Oil as a Morgan
contribution to the worldwide struggle. Furthermore, Mellon-owned Gulf
Oil was allied to the Shell combine, and this might well explain the
fact that former Morgan-and-Mellon lawyer Philander Knox, TR’s
Attorney-General, was happy to file the suit against Standard Oil.
Roosevelt’s successor, William Howard Taft, being
an Ohio Republican, was allied to the Rockefeller camp, and so he
proceeded to take vengeance on the Morgans by filing anti-trust suits to
break up the two leading Morgan trusts, International Harvester
and United States Steel. It was now all-out war, and so the
Morgans in 1912 deliberately created a new party, the Progressive
Party, headed by former Morgan partner, George W. Perkins. The successful aim
of the Progressive Party was to bring Theodore Roosevelt out of retirement
to run for President, in order to break Taft, and to elect, for the first
time in a generation, a Democratic President. The new party was liquidated soon
after.
Supporters of Roosevelt were studded with
financiers in the Morgan ambit, including Judge Elbert Gary, chairman of
the board of U.S. Steel; Medill McCormick of the International Harvester
family, and Willard Straight, Morgan’s partner. In the same year,
Straight and his heiress wife, Dorothy Whitney, founded the weekly
magazine of opinion, The New Republic, symbolizing the
growing alliance for war and statism between the Morgans and
various of the more moderate (i.e., non-Marxist) progressive and
socialist intellectuals.
Morgan, Wilson and War
The Morgan-Progressive Party ploy deliberately
insured the election of Woodrow Wilson as a Democratic President. Wilson
himself, until almost the time of running for President, was for
several years on the board of the Morgan-controlled Mutual Life
Insurance Company. He was also surrounded by Morgan men. His
son-in-law, William Gibbs McAdoo, who became Wilson’s Secretary of the
Treasury, was a failing businessman in New York City when he was bailed out
and befriended by J.P. Morgan and his associates. The Morgans then set
McAdoo up as president of New York’s Hudson and Manhattan Railroad until
his appointment in the Wilson Administration. McAdoo was to spend the rest
of his financial and political life securely in the Morgan ambit.
The main sponsor of Wilson’s run for the
Presidency was George W. Harvey, head of Morgan-controlled Harper &
Brothers publishers; other major backers included Wall Street financier
and Morgan associate Thomas Fortune Ryan, and Wilson’s college
classmate and Morgan ally, Cyrus H. McCormick, head of International
Harvester.
Another close friend and leading political
adviser of Wilson was New York City banker George Foster Peabody, son of
the Boston Brahmin and a Morgan banker. A particularly fascinating figure
in Wilson’s fateful foreign policy was “Colonel” Edward Mandell House, of the
wealthy House family of Texas, which was deeply involved in landowning,
trade, banking, and railroads. House himself was head for several years of
the Trinity and Brazos Valley Railway, financed by the House family in
collaboration with Morgan-associated Boston financial interests,
particularly of the Old Colony Trust Company. The mysterious House, though
never graced with an official government post, is generally
acknowledged to have been Wilson’s all-powerful foreign policy adviser
and aide for virtually his entire two terms.
By 1914, the Morgan empire was in increasingly
shaky financial shape. The Morgans had long been committed to railroads, and after
the turn of the century the highly subsidized and regulated railroads
entered their permanent decline. The Morgans had also not been active
enough in the new capital market for industrial securities, which had
begun in the 1890s, allowing Kuhn-Loeb to beat them in the race for
industrial finance. To make matters worse, the $400 million Morgan-run New
Haven Railroad went bankrupt in 1914.
At the moment of great financial danger for the
Morgans, the advent of World War I came as a godsend. Long connected to
British, including Rothschild, financial interests, the Morgans
leaped into the fray, quickly securing the appointment, for J.P.
Morgan & Co., of fiscal agent for the warring British and
French governments, and monopoly underwriter for their war bonds
in the United States. J.P. Morgan also became the fiscal agent for
the Bank of England, the powerful English central bank. Not only that: the
Morgans were heavily involved in financing American munitions and other
firms exporting war material to Britain and France. J.P. Morgan & Co.,
moreover, became the central authority organizing and channeling war
purchases for the two Allied nations.
The United States had been in a sharp recession
during 1913 and 1914; unemployment was high, and many factories were
operating at only 60% of capacity. In November 1914, Andrew
Carnegie, closely allied with the Morgans ever since his Carnegie
Steel Corporation had merged into the formation of United States
Steel, wrote to President Wilson lamenting business conditions but happily
expecting a great change for the better from Allied purchases of U.S.
exports.
Sure enough, war material exports zoomed. Iron
and steel exports quintupled from 1914 to 1917, and the average profit
rate of iron and steel firms rose from 7.4% to 28.7% from 1915
until 1917. Explosives exports to the Allies rose over ten-fold
during 1915 alone. Overall, from 1915 to 1917, the export
department of J.P. Morgan and Co. negotiated more than $3 billion of
contracts to Britain and France. By early 1915, Secretary McAdoo was
writing to Wilson hailing the “great prosperity” being brought by
war exports to the Allies, and a prominent business writer wrote the
following year that “War, for Europe, is meaning devastation and death;
for America a bumper crop of new millionaires and a hectic hastening of
prosperity revival.”
Deep in Allied bonds and export of munitions, the
Morgans were doing extraordinarily well; and their great rivals,
Kuhn-Loeb, being pro-German, were necessarily left out of the Allied
wartime bonanza. But there was one hitch: it became imperative
that the Allies win the war. It is not surprising, therefore,
that from the beginning of the great conflict, J.P. Morgan and
his associates did everything they possibly could to push the
supposedly neutral United States into the war on the side of England
and France. As Morgan himself put it: “We agreed that we should do
all that was lawfully in our power to help the Allies win the war as soon
as possible.”
Accordingly, Henry P. Davison, Morgan partner, set
up the Aerial Coast Patrol in 1915, to get the public in the mood to
search the skies for German planes. Bernard M. Baruch, long-time
associate of the extremely wealthy copper magnates, the Guggenheim
family, financed the Businessmen’s Training Camp, at Plattsburgh,
New York, designed to push for universal military training and
preparations for war. Also participating in financing the camp were
Morgan partner Willard Straight, and former Morgan partner Robert
Bacon. In addition to J.P. Morgan himself, a raft of
Morgan-affiliated political leaders whooped it up for immediate entry of
the U.S. into the war on the side of the Allies: including Henry
Cabot Lodge, Elihu Root, and Theodore Roosevelt.
In addition, the National Security League was
founded in December, 1914, to call for American entry into the war against
Germany. The NSL issued warnings against a German invasion of the
U.S., once England was defeated, and it called all advocates of
peace and non-intervention, “pro-German,” “dangerous aliens,” “traitors,” and
“spies.”
The NSL also advocated universal military
training, conscription, and the U.S. buildup of the largest navy in the
world. Prominent in the organization of the National Security League were
Frederic R. Coudert, Wall Street attorney for the British, French,
and Russian governments; Simon and Daniel Guggenheim; T.
Coleman DuPont, of the munitions, family; and a host of prominent
Morgan-oriented financiers; including former Morgan partner Robert Bacon;
Henry Clay Prick of Carnegie Steel; Judge Gary of U.S. Steel; GeorgeW.
Perkins, Morgan partner, who has been termed “the secretary of state” for
the Morgan interests; former President Theodore Roosevelt; and J.P. Morgan
himself.
A particularly interesting founding associate of
NSL was a man who has dominated American foreign policy during the 20th
century: Henry L. Stimson, Secretary of War under William H. Taft
and Franklin D. Roosevelt, and Secretary of State under
Herbert Hoover. Stimson, a Wall Street lawyer in the Morgan ambit,
was a protégé of Morgan’s personal attorney Elihu Root, and two of
his cousins were partners in the Morgan-dominated Wall Street utility
stock market and banking firm of Bonbright & Co.
While the Morgans and other financial interests
were beating the drums for war, even more influential in pushing the only
partially reluctant Wilson into the war were his foreign policy
Svengali, Colonel House, and House’s protégé, Walter Hines Page, who
was appointed Ambassador to Great Britain. Page’s salary in this
prestigious influential post was handsomely subsidized through Colonel
House by copper magnate Cleveland H. Dodge, a prominent adviser to Wilson,
who benefited greatly from munitions sales to the Allies.
Colonel House liked to pose as an abject
instrument of President Wilson’s wishes. But before and after U.S. entry
into the war, House shamelessly manipulated Wilson, in secret and
traitorous collaboration with the British, to push the President first
into entering the war and then into following British wishes instead of setting an
independent American course.
Thus, in 1916, House wrote to his friend Frank L.
Polk, Counselor to the State Department and later counselor to J.P.
Morgan, that “the President must be guided” not to be independent
of British desires. Advising British Prime Minister Arthur Balfour on
how best to handle Wilson, House counselled Balfour to exaggerate British
difficulties in order to get more American aid, and warned him never to
mention a negotiated peace. Furthermore, Balfour leaked to Colonel House the
details of various secret Allied treaties that they both knew the nave
Wilson would not accept, and they both agreed to keep the treaties from
the President.
Similarly, soon after the U.S. entered the war,
the British sent to the U.S. as personal liaison between the Prime
Minister and the White House the young chief of British military
intelligence, Sir William Wiseman. House and Wiseman quickly entered a
close collaboration, with House coaching the Englishman on the
best way of dealing with the President, such as “tell him only
what he wants to hear,” never argue with him, and discover and
exploit his weaknesses.
In turn, Britain’s top intelligence agent
manipulated House, constantly showering him with flattery, and established
a close friendship with the Colonel, getting an apartment in the same
building in New York City, and travelling together abroad.
Collaborating with House in his plan to manipulate Wilson into
pro-British policies was William Phillips, an Assistant Secretary of State who
had married into the Astor family.
Collaborating with House in supplying Wiseman
with illegal information and working with the British agent against Wilson
were two important American officials. One was Walter Lippman, a young
socialist who had been named by Morgan partner Willard Straight as oneof
the three editors of his New Republic, a magazine which, needless to say,
led ‘the parade of progressive and socialist intellectuals in favor of
entering the war on the side of the Allies.
Lippmann soon vaulted into important roles in the
war effort: assistant to the Secretary of War; then secretary of the
secret group of historians called The Inquiry, established under
Colonel House in late 1917 to plan the peace settlement at the end
of the war. Lippmann later left The Inquiry to go overseas for
American military intelligence.
Another important collaborator with Wiseman was
businessman and scholar George Louis Beer, who was in charge of African
and Asian colonial matters for The Inquiry. Wiseman secretly showed
British documents on African colonies to Beer, who in turn leaked Inquiry
reports to British intelligence.
The plans of Colonel House and his biased young
historians of The Inquiry were put into effect at the peace settlement at
Versailles. Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Russia were cruelly
dismembered, thus insuring that Germany and Russia, once recovered from
thedevastation of the war, would bend their energies toward getting their
territories back. In that way, conditions were virtually set for World War
II.
Not only that: the Allies at Versailles took
advantage of the temporary power vacuum in Eastern Europe to create new
independent states that would function as client states of Britain and
France, be part of the Morgan-Rothschild financial network, and
help keep Germany and Russia down permanently. It was an
impossible task for these new small nations, a task made more
difficult by the fact that the young historians managed to rewrite
the map of Europe at Versailles to make the Poles, the Czechs, and the
Serbs dominant over all the other minority nationalities forcibly
incorporated into the new countries. These subjugated peoples – the
Germans, Ukrainians, Slovaks, Croats, Slovenes, etc – thus became built-in
allies for the revanchist dreams of Germany and Russia.
American entry into World War I in April 1917
prevented negotiated peace between the warring powers, and drove the
Allies forward into a peace of unconditional surrender and dismemberment,
a peace which, as we have seen, set the stage for World War II. Americanentry
thus cost countless lives on both sides, chaos and disruption throughout
central and eastern Europe at war’s end, and the consequent rise of
Bolshevism, fascism, and Nazism to power in Europe. In this way, Woodrow
Wilson’s decision to enter the war may have been the single most fateful
action of the 20th century, causing untold and unending misery and
destruction. But Morgan profits were expanded and assured.
The Fortuitous Fed
The massive U.S. loans to the Allies, and the
subsequent American entry into the war, could not have been financed by
the relatively hard-money, gold standard system that existed before 1914.
Fortuitously, an institution was established at the end of 1913 that
made the loans and war finance possible: the Federal Reserve System. By
centralizing reserves, by providing a government-privileged lender of last
resort to the banks, the Fed enabled the banking system to inflate money
and credit, finance loans to the Allies, and float massive deficits once
the U.S. entered the war. In addition, the seemingly odd Fed policy of
creating an acceptance market out of thin air by standing ready to
purchase acceptance at a subsidized rate, enabled the Fed to rediscount
acceptance on munitions exports.
The Federal Reserve was the outgrowth of five
years of planning, amending, and compromising among various politicians
and concerned financial groups, led by the major financial interests,
including the Morgans, the Rockefellers, and the Kuhn, Loebs, along
withtheir assorted economists and technicians.
Particularly notable among the Rockefeller
interests were Senator Nelson W. Aldrich (R.-R.I.), father-in-law of John
D. Rockefeller, Jr., and Frank A. Vanderlip, vice president of
Rockefeller’s National City Bank of New York. From the Kuhn, Loebs came
the prominent Paul Moritz Warburg, of the German
investment-banking firm of M.M. Warburg and Company. Warburg emigrated to
the United States in 1902 to become a senior partner at Kuhn, Loeb
& Co., after which he spent most of his time agitating for a central bank
in the United States.
Also igniting the drive for a Federal Reserve
System was Jacob H. Schiff, powerful head of Kuhn, Loeb to whom Warburg
was related by marriage. Seconding and sponsoring Warburg in academia
was the prominent Columbia University economist Edwin R.A.
Seligman, of the investment-banking family of J. & W. Seligman
and Company; Seligman was the brother of Warburg’s brother-in-law.
The Morgans were prominently represented in the
planning and agitation for a Central Bank by Henry P. Davison, Morgan
partner; Charles D. Norton, president of Morgan’s First National Bank of
New York; A. Barton Hepburn, head of Morgan’s Chase National Bank;and
Victor Morawetz, attorney and banker in the Morgan ranks and chairman of
the executive committee of the Morgan-controlled Atchison, Topeka, and
Santa Fe Railroad.
While the establishment of the Federal Reserve
System in late 1913 was the result of a coalition of Morgan, Rockefeller,
and Kuhn, Loeb interests, there is no question which financial group controlled the
personnel and the policies of the Fed once it was established.(While
influential in framing policies of the Fed, Federal Reserve Board member
Warburg was disqualified from leadership because of his pro-German views.)
The first Federal Reserve Board, appointed by President Wilson in 1914,
included Warburg; one Rockefeller man, Frederic A. Delano, uncle of
Franklin D. Roosevelt, and president of the Rockefeller-controlled Wabash
Railway; and an Alabama banker, who had both Morgan and Rockefeller connections.
Overshadowing these three were three definite
Morgan men, and a university economist, Professor Adolph C. Miller of
Berkeley, whose wife’s family had Morgan connections. The three definite
Morgan men were Secretary of the Treasury McAdoo; Comptroller of the
Currency John Skelton Williams, a Virginia banker and long-time
McAdoo aide on Morgan railroads; and Assistant Secretary of the
Treasury Charles S. Hamlin, a Boston attorney who had married into
a wealthy Albany family long connected with the Morgan-dominated New
York Central Railroad.
But more important than the composition of the
Federal Reserve Board was the man who became the first Governor of the New
York Federal Reserve Bank and who single-handedly dominated Fed policy
from its inception until his death in 1928. This man was BenjaminStrong,
who had spent virtually his entire business and personal life in the
circle of top associates of J.P. Morgan. A secretary of several trust
companies (banks doing trust business) in New York City, Strong became
neighbor and close friend of three top Morgan partners, Henry P. Davison,
Dwight Morrow, and Thomas W. Lamont. Davison, in particular, became his
mentor, and brought him into Morgan’s Bankers Trust company, where he soon
succeeded Lamont as vice-president, and then finally became
president. When Strong was offered the post of Governor of the New
York Fed, it was Davison who persuaded him to take the job.
Strong was an enthusiast for American entry into
the war, and it was his mentor Davison who had engineered the coup of
getting Morgan named as sole underwriter and purchasing agent for Britain
and France. Strong worked quickly to formalize collaboration with the
Bank of England, collaboration which would continue in force throughout
the 1920s. The Federal Reserve Bank of New York became foreign agent for
the Bank of England, and vice versa.
The main collaboration throughout the 1920s, much
of it kept secret from the Federal Reserve Board in Washington, was
between Strong and the man who soon became Governor of the Bank of
England, Montagu Collet Norman. Norman and Strong were not only
fastfriends, but had important investment-banking ties, Norman’s uncle
having been a partner of the great English banking firm of Baring
Brothers, and his grandfather a partner in the international banking house
of Brown Shipley & Co., the London branch of the Wall Street banking
firm of Brown Brothers. Before coming to the Bank of England, Norman
himself had worked at the Wall Street office of Brown Brothers, and then returned
to London to become a partner of Brown Shipley.
The major fruit of the Norman-Strong
collaboration was Strong’s being pressured to inflate money and credit in
the U.S. throughout the 1920s, in order to keep England from losing gold
to the U.S. from its inflationary policies. Britain’s predicament
came from its insistence on going back to the gold standard after the
war at the highly overvalued pre-war par for the pound, and then insisting
on inflating rather than deflating to make its exports competitively
priced in the world market. Hence, Britain needed to induce other
countries, particularly the U.S., to inflate along with it. The
Strong-Norman-Morgan connection did the job, setting the stage for the
great financial collapse of 1929–1931.
As World War I drew to a close, influential
Britons and Americans decided that intimate post-war collaboration between
the two countries required more than just close cooperation
between the central banks. Also needed were permanent organizations to
promote joint Anglo-American policies to dominate the postwar world.
The Round Table
In England, Cecil Rhodes had launched a secret
society in 1891 with the aim of maintaining and expanding the British
Empire to re-incorporate the United States. After the turn of the 20th century,
the direction, organization, and expansion of the society fell to Rhodes’s
friend and executor, Alfred Lord Milner. The Milner Group dominated
domestic planning in Britain during World War I, and particularly the
planning for post-war foreign and colonial policy. The Milner Group
staffed the British delegation of experts to Versailles. To promote the
intellectual agitation for such a policy, the Milners had also set up the
Round Table Groups in England and abroad in 1910.
The first
American to be asked to join the Round Table was George Louis Beer, who
came to its attention when his books attacked the American Revolution and
praised the British Empire of the 18th century. Such loyalty could not go
unrewarded, and so Beer became a member of the Group about 1912 and became
the American correspondent of Round Table magazine. We have seen
Beer’s pro-British role as colonial expert for The Inquiry. He was also
the chief U.S. expert on colonial affairs at Versailles,and afterward the
Milner Group made Beer head of the MandateDepartment of the League of Nations.
During the war, Beer, Anglophile Yale historian
George Burton Adams, and powerful Columbia University historian James T.
Shotwell, an important leader of The Inquiry and head of the
National Board for Historical Services, which emitted deceptive
propaganda for the war effort, formed a secret society to promote
Anglo-American collaboration. Finally, led by Beer for the United States
and the head of the Round Table group in England, Lionel Curtis, the
British and U.S. historical staffs at Versailles took the occasion to
found a permanent organization to agitate for an informally, if not
formally, reconstituted Anglo-American Empire.
The new group, the Institute of International
Affairs, was formed at a meeting at the Majestic Hotel in Paris on May 3O,
1919. A six-man organizing committee was formed, three
Milnerites from Britain, and three Americans: Shotwell; Harvard historian Archibald
C. Coolidge, head of the Eastern European desk of the Inquiry, and member
of the Morgan-oriented Boston financial family; and James Brown Scott,
Morgan lawyer who was to write a biography of Robert Bacon. The British branch,
the Royal Institute of International Affairs, set up a committee to
supervise writing a multi-volume history of the Versailles Peace
Conference; the committee was financed by a gift from Thomas W. Lamont,
Morganpartner.
The CFR
The American branch of the new group took a while
to get going. Finally, the still inactive American Institute of
International Affairs merged with a defunct outfit, begun in 1918, of
New York businessmen concerned with the postwar world, and
organized as a dinner club to listen to foreign visitors. This
organization, the Council on Foreign Relations, had as its honorary
chairman Morgan lawyer Elihu Root, while Alexander Hemphill,
chairman of Morgan’s Guaranty Trust Company, was chairman of its
finance committee. In August 1921, the two organizations merged
into the new Council on Foreign Relations, Inc., a high-powered
organization embracing bankers, lawyers, and intellectuals.
While varied financial interests were represented
in the new organization, the CFR was Morgan-dominated, from top to bottom.
Honorary president was Elihu Root. President was John W. Davis, Wilson’s
Solicitor-General, and now chief counsel for J.P. Morgan & Co. Davis
was to become Democratic Presidential candidate in 1924.
Secretary-Treasurer of the new CFR was Harvard economic historian Edwin F.
Gay, director of planning and statistics for the Shipping Board
during the war, and now editor of the New York Evening Post, ownedby his
mentor, Morgan partner, Thomas W. Lamont.
It was Gay who had the idea of founding Foreign
Affairs, the CFR’s quarterly journal, and who suggested both his
Harvard colleague Archibald Coolidge as the first editor, and the NewYork
Post reporter Hamilton Fish Armstrong as assistant editor and executive
director of the CFR. Other prominent officials in the new CFR were: Frank
L. Polk, former Under-Secretary of State and now lawyer for J.P. Morgan
& Co; Paul M. Warburg of Kuhn, Loeb; Otto H. Kahn of Kuhn, Loeb;
former Under-Secretary of State under Wilson, Norman H. Davis, a banking
associate of the Morgans; and as vice-president, Paul D. Cravath,
senior partner of the Rockefeller-oriented Wall Street law firm
of Cravath, Swaine, and Moore.
After World War II, the Council on Foreign
Relations became dominated by the Rockefeller rather than by the Morgan
interests, a shift of power reflecting a general alteration in financial
power in the world at large. After World War II, the rise of oil
to prominence brought the Morgans and Rockefellers – once intense
rivals – into an Eastern Establishment of which the Rockefellers were the
senior, and the Morgans the junior, partners.
Rockefeller, Morgan, and War
During the 1930s, the Rockefellers pushed hard
for war against Japan, which they saw as competing with them vigorously
for oil and rubber resources in Southeast Asia and as endangering the
Rockefellers’ cherished dreams of a mass “China market” for petroleum
products. On the other hand, the Rockefellers took a
non-interventionist position in Europe, where they had close financial
ties with German firms such as I.G. Farben and Co., and very few
close relations with Britain and France. The Morgans, in contrast, as
usual deeply committed to their financial ties with Britain and France,
once again plumped early for war with Germany, while their interest in the
Far East had become minimal. Indeed, U.S.Ambassador to Japan, Joseph C. Grew,
former Morgan partner, was one of the few officials in the Roosevelt
Administration genuinely interested in peace with Japan.
World War II might therefore be considered, from
one point of view, as a coalition war: the Morgans got their war in
Europe, the Rockefellers theirs in Asia. Such disgruntled Morganmen as
Lewis W. Douglas and Dean G. Acheson (a protégé of Henry Stimson), who had
left the early Roosevelt Administration in disgust at its soft money
policies and economic nationalism, came happily roaring back into
government service with the advent of World War II. Nelson A. Rockefeller,
for his part, became head of Latin American activities during World War
II, and thereby acquired his taste for government service.
After World War II, the united
Rockefeller-MorganKuhn, Loeb Eastern Establishment was not allowed to
enjoy its financial and political supremacy unchallenged for long.
“Cowboy” Sun Belt firms, maverick oil men and construction men from Texas,
Florida, and southernCalifornia, began to challenge the Eastern Establishment
“Yankees” for political power. While both groups favor the Cold War,
the Cowboys are more nationalistic, more hawkish, and less
inclined to worry about what our European allies are thinking. They
are also much less inclined to bail out the now
Rockefeller-controlled Chase Manhattan Bank and other Wall Street banks
that loaned recklessly to Third World and Communist countries and
expect the U.S. taxpayer – through outright taxes or the printing of
U.S. dollars – to pick up the tab.
It should be clear that the name of the political
party in power is far less important than the particular regime’s
financial and banking connections. The foreign policy power for so
long of Nelson Rockefeller’s personal foreign affairs adviser,
Henry A. Kissinger, a discovery of the extraordinarily powerful
Rockefeller–Chase Manhattan Bank elder statesman John J. McCloy, is
testimony to the importance of financial power. As is the successful
lobbying by Kissinger and Chase Manhattan’s head, David
Rockefeller, to induce Jimmy Carter to allow the ailing Shah of Iran
into the U.S. – thus precipitating the humiliating hostage crisis.
Despite differences in nuance, it is clear that
Ronald Reagan’s originally proclaimed challenge to Rockefeller-Morgan
power in the Council of Foreign Relations and to the Rockefeller-created
Trilateral Commission has fizzled, and that the “permanent
government” continues to rule regardless of the party nominally in power. As
a result, the much-heralded “bipartisan foreign policy” consensus imposed
by the Establishment since World War II seems to remainsafely in place.
David Rockefeller, chairman of the board of his
family’s Chase Manhattan Bank from 1970 until recently, established the
Trilateral Commission in 1973 with the financial backing of the CFR and
the Rockefeller Foundation. Joseph Kraft, syndicated Washington columnist
whohimself has the distinction of being both a CFR member and a Trilateralist,
has accurately described the CFR as a “school for statesmen,” which “comes
close to being an organ of whatC. Wright Mills has called the Power Elite – a
group of men, similar in interest and outlook, shaping events from
invulnerable positions behind the scenes.” The idea of the Trilateral
Commission was to internationalize policy formation, the commission
consisting of a small group of multinational corporate leaders,
politicians, and foreign policy experts from the U.S., Western Europe,
and Japan, who meet to coordinate economic and foreign policy amongtheir
respective nations.
Perhaps the most powerful single figure in
foreign policy since World War II, a beloved adviser to all Presidents, is
the octogenarian John J. McCloy. During World War II, McCloy virtually ran
the War Department as Assistant to aging Secretary Stimson; it
was McCloy who presided over the decision to round up all
Japanese-Americans and place them in concentration camps in World War II,
and he is virtually the only American left who still justifies
that action.
Before and during the war, McCloy, a disciple of
Morgan lawyer Stimson, moved in the Morgan orbit; his brother-in-law, John
S. Zinsser, was on the board of directors of J.P. Morgan & Co.
during the 1940s. But, reflecting the postwar power shift from
Morgan to Rockefeller, McCloy moved quickly into the Rockefeller
ambit. He became a partner of the Wall Street corporate law firm
of Milbank, Tweed, Hope, Hadley & McCloy, which had long
served the Rockefeller family and the Chase Bank as legal counsel.
From there he moved to become Chairman of the
Board of the Chase Manhattan Bank, a director of the Rockefeller
Foundation, and of Rockefeller Center, Inc., and finally, from 1953 until
1970, chairman of the board of the Council on Foreign Relations. During the
Truman Administration, McCloy served as President of the World Bank and
then U.S. High Commissioner for Germany. He was also a special adviser to
President John F. Kennedy on Disarmament, and chairman of Kennedy’s
Coordinating Committee on the Cuban Crisis. It was McCloy who “discovered”
Professor Henry A. Kissinger for the Rockefeller forces. It is no wonder
that John K. Galbraith and Richard Rovere have dubbed McCloy “Mr.
Establishment.”
A glance at foreign policy leaders since World
War II will reveal the domination of the banker elite. Truman’s first
Secretary of Defense was James V. Forrestal, former president of the
investment-banking firm of Dillon, Read & Co., closely allied to the
Rockefeller financial group. Forrestal had also been a board member of
the Chase Securities Corporation, an affiliate of the Chase
National Bank.
Another Truman Defense Secretary was Robert A.
Lovett, a partner of the powerful New York investment-banking house of
Brown Brothers Harriman. At the same time that he was Secretary of
Defense, Lovett continued to be a trustee of the Rockefeller
Foundation.Secretary of the Air Force Thomas K. Finletter was a top
Wall Street corporate lawyer and member of the board of the CFR
while serving in the cabinet. Ambassador to Soviet Russia,
Ambassador to Great Britain, and Secretary of Commerce in the Truman
Administration was the powerful multi-millionaire W. Averell Harriman, an
often underrated but dominant force within the Democratic Party
since the days of FDR. Harriman was a partner of Brown Brothers Harriman.
Also Ambassador to Great Britain under Truman was
Lewis W. Douglas, brother-in-law of John J. McCloy, a trustee of the
Rockefeller Foundation, and a board member of the Council on Foreign
Relations. Following Douglas as Ambassador to the Court of St. James
wasWalter S. Gifford, chairman of the board of AT&T, and member of the
board of trustees of the Rockefeller Foundation for almost two decades.
Ambassador to NATO under Truman was William H. Draper, Jr., vice-president
of Dillon, Read &Co.
Also influential in helping the Truman
Administration organize the Cold War was director of the policy planning
staff of the State Department, Paul H. Nitze. Nitze, whose wife was a
member of the Pratt family, associated with the Rockefeller family
since the origins of Standard Oil, had been vice-president of
Dillon, Read & Co.
When Truman entered the Korean War, he created an
Office of Defense Mobilization to run the domestic economy during the war.
The first director was Charles E. (“Electric Charlie”) Wilson,
president of the Morgan-controlled General Electric Company, who
also served as board member of the Morgans’ Guaranty Trust
Company. His two most influential assistants were Sidney J.
Weinberg, ubiquitous senior partner in the Wall Street
investment-bankingfirm of Goldman Sachs & Co., and former General Lucius
D. Clay, chairman of the board of Continental Can Co., and a
director of the Lehman Corporation.
Succeeding McCloy as President of the World Bank,
and continuing in that post throughout the two terms of Dwight Eisenhower,
was Eugene Black. Black had served for fourteen years as
vice-president of the Chase National Bank, and was persuaded to take the
World Bank post by the bank’s chairman of the board, Winthrop W.
Aldrich, brother-in-law of John D. Rockefeller, Jr.
The Eisenhower Administration proved to be a
field day for the Rockefeller interests. While president of Columbia
University, Eisenhower was invited to high-level dinners where he met and
was groomed for President by top leaders from the Rockefeller and
Morgan ambits, including the chairman of the board of
Rockefeller’s Standard Oil of New Jersey, the presidents of six other
big oil companies, including Standard of California and
Socony-Vacuum, and the executive vice-president of J.P. Morgan & Co.
One dinner was hosted by Clarence Dillon, the
multi-millionaire retired founder of Dillon, Read & Co., where the
guests included Russell B. Leffingwell, chairman of the board of bothJ.P.
Morgan & Co. and the CFR (before McCloy); John M. Schiff, a senior
partner of the investment-banking house of Kuhn, Loeb & Co.; the
financier Jeremiah Milbank, a director of the Chase Manhattan Bank; and
John D. Rockefeller, Jr.
Even earlier, during 1949, Eisenhower had been
introduced through a special study group to key figures in the CFR. The
study group devised a plan to create a new organization called the
American Assembly – in essence an expanded CFR study group – whose
main function was reputedly to build up Eisenhower’s prospects for the
Presidency. A leader of the “Citizens for Eisenhower” committee, who later
became Ike’s Ambassador to Great Britain, was the multi-millionaire John
Hay Whitney, scion of several wealthy families, whose granduncle, Oliver
H. Payne, had been one of the associates of John D. Rockefeller, Sr. in
founding the Standard Oil Company. Whitney was head of his own
investment concern, J.H. Whitney & Co., and later became
publisher of the New York Herald Tribune.
Running foreign policy during the Eisenhower
Administration was the Dulles family, led by Secretary of State John
Foster Dulles, who had also concluded the U.S. peace treaty with Japan
under Harry Truman. Dulles had for three decades been a senior
partner of the top Wall Street corporate law firm of Sullivan
& Cromwell, whose most important client was Rockefeller’s
Standard Oil Company of New Jersey. Dulles had been for fifteen
years a member of the board of the Rockefeller Foundation, and
before assuming the post of Secretary of State was chairman of
the board of that institution. Most important is the
little-known fact that Dulles’s wife was Janet Pomeroy Avery, a first
cousin of John D. Rockefeller, Jr.
Heading the super-secret Central Intelligence
Agency during the Eisenhower years was Dulles’s brother, Allen Welsh
Dulles, also a partner in Sullivan & Cromwell. Allen Dulles had long
been a trustee of the CFR and had served as its president from 1947 to
1951. Their sister, Eleanor Lansing Dulles, was head of the
Berlin desk of the State Department during that decade.
Under-Secretary of State, and the man who
succeeded John Foster Dulles in the spring 1959, was former Massachusetts
Governor Christian A. Herter. Herter’s wife, like Nitze’s, was a member of
the Pratt family. Indeed, his wife’s uncle, Herbert L. Pratt, had
been for many years president or chairman of the board of
Standard Oil Company of New York. One of Mrs. Herter’s cousins,
Richardson Pratt, had served as assistant treasurer of Standard Oil
of New Jersey up to 1945. Furthermore, one of Herter’s own uncles, a
physician, had been for many years treasurer of the Rockefeller Institute
for Medical Research.
Herter was succeeded as Under-Secretary of State
by Eisenhower’s Ambassador to France, C. Douglas Dillon, son of Clarence,
and himself Chairman of the Board of Dillon, Read & Co. Dillon was
soon to become a trustee of the Rockefeller Foundation.
Perhaps to provide some balance for his
banker-business coalition, Eisenhower appointed as Secretary of Defense
three men in the Morgan rather than the Rockefeller ambit. Charles B.
(“Engine Charlie”) Wilson was president of General Motors, member of the
board of J.P.Morgan & Co. Wilson’s successor, Neil H. McElroy, was
president of Proctor & Gamble Co. His board chairman, R.R. Deupree, was
also a director of J.P. Morgan & Co. The third Secretary of Defense,
who had been Under-Secretary and Secretary of the Navy under Eisenhower,
was Thomas S. Gates, Jr., who had been a partner of the Morgan-connected
Philadelphia investment-banking firm of Drexel & Co. When Gates
stepped down as DefenseSecretary, he became president of the newly formed
flagship commercial bank for the Morgan interests, the Morgan
Guaranty Trust Co.
Serving as Secretary of the Navy and then Deputy
Secretary of Defense (and later Secretary of the Treasury) under
Eisenhower was Texas businessman Robert B. Anderson. After leaving the
Defense Department, Anderson became a board member of the
Rockefeller-controlled American Overseas Investing Co., and, before
becoming Secretary of the Treasury, he borrowed $84,000 from Nelson A.
Rockefeller to buy stock in Nelson’s International Basic Economy
Corporation.
Head of the important Atomic Energy Commission
during the Eisenhower years was Lewis L. Strauss. For two decades, Strauss
had been a partner in the investment-banking firm of Kuhn, Loeb
& Co. In 1950, Strauss had become financial adviser to the
Rockefeller family, soon also becoming a board member of Rockefeller
Center, Inc.
A powerful force in deciding foreign policy was
the National Security Council, which included on it the Duller brothers,
Strauss, and Wilson. Particularly important is the post of national
security adviser to the President. Eisenhower’s first national
security adviser was Robert Cutler, president of the Old Colony Trust Co.,
the largest trust operation outside New York City. The Old Colony was a
trust affiliate of the First National Bank of Boston.
After two years in the top national security
post, Cutler returned to Boston to become chairman of the board of Old
Colony Trust, returning after a while to the national security slot for
two more years. In between, Eisenhower had two successive
national security advisers. The first was Dillon Anderson, a
Houston corporate attorney, who did work for several oil companies. Particularly
significant was Anderson’s position as chairman of the board of a small
but fascinating Connecticut firm called Electro-Mechanical Research, Inc.
Electro-Mechanical was closely associated with certain Rockefeller
financiers; thus, one of its directors was Godfrey Rockefeller, a limited
partner in the investment-banking firm of Clark, Dodge & Co.
After more than a year, Anderson resigned from
his national security post and was replaced by William H. Jackson, a
partner of the investment firm of J. H. Whitney & Co. Before assuming
his powerful position, Dillon Anderson had been one of several
men serving as special hush-hush consultants to the National
Security Council. Another special adviser was Eugene Holman,
president of Rockefeller’s Standard Oil Company of New Jersey.
We may mention two important foreign policy
actions of the Eisenhower Administration which seem to reflect the
striking influence of personnel directly tied to bankers and financial
interests. In 1951, the regime of Mohammed Mossadegh in Iran decided
to nationalize the British-owned oil holdings of the
Anglo-Iranian Oil company. It took no time for the newly established
Eisenhower Administration to intervene heavily in this situation. CIA
director and former Standard Oil lawyer Allen W. Dulles flew to
Switzerland to organize the covert overthrow of the Mossadegh regime,
the throwing of Mossadegh into prison, and the restoration of
the Shah to the throne of Iran.
After lengthy behind-the-scenes negotiations, the
oil industry was put back into action as purchasers and refiners of
Iranian oil. But this time the picture was significantly different.
Instead of the British getting all of the oil pie, their share was
reduced to 40 percent of the new oil consortium, with five top U.S. oil
companies (Standard Oil of New Jersey, Socony-Vacuum – formerly Standard
Oil of N.Y. and now Mobil – Standard Oil of California, Gulf, and Texaco)
getting another 40 percent.
It was later disclosed that Secretary of State
Dulles placed a sharp upper limit on any participation in the consortium
by smaller independent oil companies in the United States. In
addition to the rewards to the Rockefeller interests, the CIA’s
man-on-the-spot directing the operation, Kermit Roosevelt, received his
due by quickly becoming a vice-president of Mellon’s Gulf Oil Corp.
The Guatemalan Coup
Fresh from its CIA triumph in Iran, the
Eisenhower Administration next turned its attention to Guatemala, where
the left-liberal regime of Jacob Arbenz Guzman had nationalized 234,000
acres of uncultivated land owned by the nation’s largest
landholder, the American-owned United Fruit Company, which imported
about 60 percent of all bananas coming into the United States.
Arbenz also announced his intention of seizing
another 173,000 acres of idle United Fruit land along the Caribbean coast.
In late 1953, Eisenhower gave the CIA the assignment of organizing
a counter-revolution in Guatemala. With the actual operation
directed by former Wall Street corporate lawyer Frank Wisner of the
CIA, the agency launched a successful invasion of Guatemala, led by
exiled Army Colonel Castilo Armas, which soon overthrew theArbenz regime and
replaced it with a military junta. The Arbenz land program was abolished,
and most of its expropriated property was returned to the United Fruit
Company.
Allen W. Dulles had financial connections with
United Fruit and with various sugar companies which had also suffered land
expropriation from the Arbenz regime. For several years, while a partner
at Sullivan & Cromwell, he had been a board member of the
Rockefeller-controlled J. Henry Schroder Banking Corporation. Members of
the board of Schroder during 1953 included Delano Andrews, Sullivan
& Cromwell partner who had taken Dulles’s seat on the board;
George A. Braga, president of the Manati Sugar Company; Charles
W. Gibson, vice-president of the Rockefeller-affiliated Air
Reduction Company; and Avery Rockefeller, president of the closely
linked banking house of Schroder, Rockefeller, & Co. Members
of the board of Manati Sugar, in the meanwhile, included
Alfred Jaretski, Jr., another Sullivan & Cromwell partner;
Gerald F. Beal, president of J. Henry Schroder and chairman of
the board of the International Railways of Central America; and Henry
E. Worcester, a recently retired of executive of United Fruit.
United Fruit, furthermore, was a controlling
shareholder in International Railways, while, as in the case of Beal, the
board chairmanship of the railway had long been held by a high official of
Schroder. The close ties between United Fruit, Schroder, and
InternationalRailways may also be seen by the fact that, in 1959, the
board chairman of the railway became James McGovern, general
counsel for United Fruit. International Railway, in fact, carried
most of United Fruit’s produce from the interior to the port in
Guatemala. In addition, Dulles’s close associate and fellow trustee
of the Council of Foreign Relations in this period, and
former treasurer of the CFR, was Whitney H. Shepardson, formerly
vice-president of International Railways.
Not only that: Robert Cutler, national security
adviser to the President at the time of the coup against Arbenz, had
himself very close ties to United Fruit. Cutler’s boss at Old Colony
Trust,chairman of the board T. Jefferson Coolidge, was also, and more importantly,
board chairman at United Fruit. Indeed, many members of the board of
United Fruit, a Boston-based company, were also on the board of Old Colony
or its mother company, the FirstNational Bank of Boston.
Furthermore, during the period of planning the
Guatemalan coup, and up till a few months before its success in 1954, the
Assistant Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs was John Moors
Cabot, a well-known anti-Arbenz hawk. Cabot’s brother Thomas D.,
was an executive of United Fruit and a member of the board of
the First National Bank of Boston.
The Council on Foreign Relations played an
important role in the Guatemalan invasion. It began in the fall of 1952,
when Spruille Braden, a former Assistant Secretary of State for
Inter-American Affairs and then consultant for United Fruit, led a CFR
study group on Political Unrest in Latin America. Discussion
leader at the first meeting of the CFR-Braden group was John
McClintock, an executive of United Fruit. Former leading New Dealer
andAssistant Secretary of State Adolf A. Berle, Jr., a participant in the
study group, recorded in his diary that the U.S. should welcome an
overthrow of the Arbenz government, and noted that, “I am arranging to see
Nelson Rockefeller (himself Assistant Secretary of State for Inter-American
Affairs during World War II) who knows the situation and can work a little
with General Eisenhower.”
In the actual Guatemalan operation, President
Eisenhower himself was a CFR member, as were Allen Dulles, John M. Cabot
and Frank Wisner, the man in charge of the coup and the CIA’s deputy
director for plans. Of the twelve people in the U.S. government
identified as being involved at the top level in the Guatemalan
affair, eight were CFR members or would be within a few years. These included,
in addition to the above, Henry F. Holland, who succeeded Cabot in the
assistant secretary of state slot in 1954; Under-Secretary of State Walter
Bedell Smith, a former director of the CIA; and Ambassador to the UN Henry
Cabot Lodge.
Paving the way for the coup was a public report,
issued in December 1953 by the Committee on International Policy of the
National Planning Association on the Guatemalan situation. Head of
the Committee was Frank Altschul, secretary and vice-president of the
CFR and a partner of the international banking house of Lazard Freres, as
well as a director of the Chase National Bank and president of the General
American Investor Corp., a firm largely controlled by Lehman Brothers. The
Altschul report, signed by twenty-two committee members of whom fifteen
were CFR members, warned that “Communist infiltration in
Guatemala” was a threat to the security of the Western Hemisphere and
hinted that drastic action would probably be necessary to deal
with this menace.
Of those involved in the drastic action,
Secretary of State John Foster Dulles, while at Sullivan & Cromwell,
had once represented United Fruit in negotiating a contract with
Guatemala. Under-Secretary of State Walter Bedell Smith, after leaving the
government,became director of United Fruit, as did Robert D. Hill,
who participated in the Guatemala operation as Ambassador to
Costa Rica. Furthermore, future president of Guatemala, Miguel
Ydigoras Fuentes, noted that his own cooperation in the coup
against Arbenz was obtained by Walter Turnbull, a former executive
at United Fruit, who came to him along with two CIA agents.
JFK and the Establishment
When John F. Kennedy assumed the office of
President, the first person he turned to for foreign policy advice was
Robert A. Lovett, partner of Brown Brothers, Harriman, even though Lovett
had backed Richard Nixon. Kennedy asked Lovett to take his pick of
any of three top jobs in the Cabinet – State, Defense, and Treasury – but
the ill and aging Lovett demurred. It was at Lovett’s urging, however, that
Kennedy chose as Secretary of State Dean Rusk, president of the
Rockefeller Foundation, a post he had acquired because of the strong
backing of John Foster Dulles. Under-Secretary of State was Chester
Bowles, a trustee of the Rockefeller Foundation; Bowles was soon
replaced by corporate lawyer George Bail, who was later to become a
senior managing partner at Lehman Brothers.
For Secretary of Defense Kennedy chose Robert S.
McNamara, President of Ford Motor Company. One influential force in the
McNamara appointment was the backing of Sidney J. Weinberg, partner
of the investment-banking firm of Goldman, Sachs, & Co.,
and powerful fund-raiser for the Democratic Party. Weinberg was a
member of the board of Ford Motor Company. Perhaps even more important was
the intimate Ford connection with the investment-banking house of Lehman
Brothers, which had long carried great weight in the party; at that time,
five high-ranking Ford executives sat on the board of the One William
Street Fund, a mutual fund recently established by Lehman Brothers.
Secretary of the Air Force was Eugene Zuckert,
chairman of the board of the small Pittsburgh firm, the Nuclear Science
and Engineering Corp., controlled by the powerful Lehman Brothers. Before
going to this firm, Zuckert had been a member of the Atomic
EnergyCommission; former ABC Commissioner Gordon Dean, who had
preceded Zuckert as chairman of the board of Nuclear Science and
Engineering, was also a partner of Lehman Brothers.
General counsel of the Defense Department, and
soon to become Secretary of the Army, was Wall Street corporate lawyer
Cyrus Vance, later to become Secretary of State under Carter. Vance’s law
firm – Simpson, Thacher & Bartlett – represented Lehman Brothers
and Manufacturers Hanover Trust Co. Moreover, Vance had married into New
York’s wealthy W & J Sloane family; his father-in-law, John Sloane,
had served as a director of the United States Trust Co.
Secretary of the Treasury in the Kennedy Cabinet
was C. Douglas Dillon, of Dillon, Read and the Rockefeller Foundation.
Dillon saw no problem in serving for eight years as Ambassador to France
and as a State Department official during the Eisenhower Era,
and then segueing to the Democratic Kennedy Cabinet. Like Lovett, he
too was chosen even though he had been a big contributor to the Nixon
effort of 1960.
In the powerful post of National Security
Adviser, Kennedy selected Harvard Dean McGeorge Bundy, who had been part
of a high-powered foreign policy team advising Thomas B. Dewey in the 1948
campaign, a virtually all-Rockefeller dominated team headed by John
FosterDulles and including Dulles’s brother Allen, C. Douglas Dillon, and
Christian Herter. After that, Bundy worked for the Council on Foreign
Relations.
Bundy had been born into the wealthy Boston
Brahmin Lowell family, his mother having been a Lowell. His father Harvey
H. Bundy, was a partner in Boston’s top law firm of Choate, Hall
& Stewart, a high official of the Foreign Bondholders
Protective Council, and a director of the Merchants National Bank of Boston. McGeorge’s
brother, William, a high CIA official, was married to the daughter of
former Secretary of State Dean Acheson, and his sister Katherine married
into the socially prominent Auchinchloss family, the family of Jacqueline
Kennedy.
The strong Rockefeller influence on Kennedy
foreign policy is best seen in the fact that the new President continued
Allen W. Dulles as head of the CIA. It was at the urging of Dulles that
Kennedy decided to go ahead with the CIA’s previously planned and
disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba. Fidel Castro’s regime had
recently nationalized a large number of American-owned sugar
companies in Cuba. It might be noted that Dulles’s old law firm of
Sullivan & Cromwell served as general counsel for two of these
large sugar companies, the Francisco Sugar Co. and the Manati
Sugar Co., and that one of the board members of these firms was
Gerald F. Beal, president of the Rockefeller-oriented J. Henry
Schroder Bank, of which Dulles had once been a director.
Not only that. John L. Loeb of the Loeb, Rhoades
investment bank, whose wife was a member of the Lehman banking family,
owned a large block of stock in the nationalized Compania
Azucarera Atlantica del Golfo, a big sugar plantation in Cuba, while
one of the directors of the latter company was Harold F.
Linder, vice-chairman of the General American Investors Company,
dominated by Lehman Brothers and Lazard Freres investment bankers.
Linder was appointed head of the Export-Import Bank by President Kennedy.
After the Bay of Pigs fiasco, Dulles was replaced
as head of the CIA by West Coast industrialist John A. McCone, who also
had the capacity to serve the administrations of either party with
equal ease. Under-Secretary of the Air Force under Truman and head of
the Atomic Energy Commission under Eisenhower, McCone was president of the
Bechtel-McCone Corporation, and represents the first major incursion of
the international Bechtel construction interests into American politics.
McCone was also a board member of the California Bank of Los Angeles, and
of the Rockefeller-dominated Standard Oil Company of California.
The CIA was also heavily involved about this time
in the short-lived Katanga secession movement in the old Belgian Congo.
One of the largest of the American companies in Katanga, and a
major backer of the secession movement, was the Anglo-American
Corporation of South Africa, one of whose partners was mining magnate
Charles W. Engelhard. Engelhard’s investment banker was Dillon,
Read, the family firm of Kennedy’s Secretary of the Treasury, C.
Douglas Dillon.
We have seen that Mr. Establishment, the
Rockefeller-oriented John J. McCloy, served as Kennedy’s special adviser
on disarmament. When the U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency was
created in the fall of 1961, its first head was William C. Foster,
former Under-Secretary of State and Defense under Truman. In
between, Foster had served as a high official of the Olin Mathieson
Chemical Corp., and then board chairman of the
Rockefeller-dominated United Nuclear Corp. Foster was also a director of
the CFR.
Kennedy continued Rockefeller’s Eugene Black as
head of the powerful World Bank. When Black reached retirement age in
1962, he was replaced by George D. Woods, chairman of the board of the
prominent investment bank, First Boston Corporation. Woods had many
connections with the Rockefeller interests, including being a director
of the Chase International Investment Corp., of the
Rockefeller Foundation, and of other Rockefeller-dominated concerns.
Two important foreign policy actions of the
Kennedy Administration were the Cuban Missile Crisis and the escalation of
the war in Vietnam. Kennedy was advised during the Cuban missile
crisis by an ad hoc group called the Ex Comm, which included, along
with his official major foreign policy advisers, Robert A. Lovett and John
J. McCloy. In the Vietnam War, Kennedy brought in as Ambassador to South
Vietnam the Boston Brahmin and Morgan-oriented Henry Cabot Lodge, who had
been Eisenhower’s Ambassador to the United Nations and who had run for Vice-President
on the Nixon ticket in 1960. Virtually the last foreign policy act of
John F. Kennedy was to give the green light to Lodge and the CIA to
oust, and murder, South Vietnamese President Ngo Dinh Diem.
LBJ and the Power Elite
Lyndon Johnson’s foreign policy was dominated by
his escalation of the Vietnam conflict into a full-scale (if undeclared)
war, and of the increasing splits over the war among the financialpower
elite. Johnson retained the hawkish Rusk, McNamara, McCone, and Lodge in
their posts. As newly minted Vietnam doves were ousted from foreign policy
positions, they were replaced by hawks. Thus, William Bundy became
Assistant Secretary of State for Far Eastern Affairs, at the same time
becoming a director of the CFR. On the other hand, the increasingly
critical W. Averell Harriman was ousted from his post of
Under-Secretary of State.
Cyrus Vance continued as Johnson’s Secretary of
the Army; when he rose to Deputy Secretary of Defense, he was replaced by
Vance’s old friend and roommate at Yale, Stanley R. Resor. Resor
was a partner in the major Wall Street law firm of Debevoise,
Plimpton, Lyons, & Gates, and was the brother-in-law of
economist and banker Gabriel Hauge, president of the Manufacturers
Hanover Trust, and treasurer of the CFR.
Resor had married into the Pillsbury flour family
of Minneapolis, which had long been connected with the holding company,
the Northwest BanCorporation. After Vance retired as Deputy
Secretary of Defense to return to law practice, he was replaced by Johnson’s hard-line
Secretary of the Navy Paul Nitze, former partner of Dillon, Read, whose
wife was a member of the Rockefeller-connected Pratt family.
One important meeting at which it was decided to
escalate the Vietnam War was held in July 1965. The meeting consisted of
Johnson, his designated foreign policy and military officials, and
three key unofficial advisers: Clark M. Clifford, the chairman of the
President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board, and an attorney for the
duPonts and the Morgan-dominated General Electric Co.; Arthur H. Dean, a
partner in Rockefeller-oriented Sullivan & Cromwell and a director of
the CFR; and the ubiquitous John J. McCloy.
Shortly after the meeting, a distinguished
national committee of power elite figures was formed to back President
Johnson’s aggressive policies in Vietnam. Chairman of the committee was
Arthur H. Dean; other members were Dean Acheson; Eugene Black, who,
after retiring as head of the World Bank, returned to be a
director of Chase Manhattan; Gabriel Hauge of Manufacturers’ Trust
and the CFR; David Rockefeller, president of the Chase Manhattan Bank
and a vice-president of the CFR; and two board members of AT&T,
William B. Murphy and James R. Killian, Jr. Indeed, of the 46 members of
this pro-Vietnam War committee, 19 were prominent businessmen, bankers or
corporate lawyers. Later, when Johnson needed to raise taxes to supply
more funds for the war effort, he selected thirteen businessmen to head
the lobbying effort.
A fascinating aspect of the Johnson Administration
was the heavy influence of men connected with the powerful Democratic
investment-banking house of Lehman Brothers. Johnson’s first
Under-Secretary of State, George Ball, who left because of increasing
disillusionment with the Vietnam War, would later become a key partner of
LehmanBrothers. Johnson’s most influential unofficial adviser
was long-time and personal legal and financial adviser, Edwin
L. Weisl, a New York attorney who was a senior law partner to
Cyrus Vance at Simpson, Thacher & Bartlett. Not only was this law
firm the general counsel to Lehman Brothers, but Weisl himself was dubbed
by Fortune magazine as “Lehman’s eighteenth partner.” Weisl had great
influence at Lehman and occasionally sat in on partners’ meetings. He was
also reputed to be the closest friend of senior partner Robert Lehman, and
sat on the board of the Lehman-controlled One William Street Fund.
Another very close and influential Johnson
adviser, and a consistent hard-liner on Vietnam, was his old friend Abe
Fortas, a Washington lawyer and veteran New Dealer. During the Johnson
years, Fortas served as director, vice-president, and general counsel
for the Texas-based Greatamerica Corp., a giant holding
company controlling several insurance companies, Braniff Airways,
and two banks, including the First Western Bank and Trust Co.
of California.
During the same period, Fortas was also a
director and vice-president of the large Federated Department Stores. Both
Federated and Greatamerica had close ties with Lehman Brothers. Fred Lazarus, Jr.,
a top official of Federated, sat on the board of the Lehman-controlled One
William Street Fund, along with Edwin Weisl. And the only two non-Texans
on the board of Greatamerica Corp. were William H. Osborn, Jr., of Lehman
Brothers, and Gustave L. Levy, a partner in the closely allied Wall Street
investment bank of Goldman, Sachs & Co. Goldman, Sachs was the senior
banking adviser for the Murchison Texas oil interests, a group with whom
Lyndon Johnson was personally allied.
Finally, after Henry Cabot Lodge retired as the
hawkish Ambassador to South Vietnam in 1967, he was replaced by Ellsworth
Bunker. Bunker, who had been president of the National Sugar
Refining Company, served as ambassador to various countries in the
EisenhowerAdministration, and then Ambassador to the Organization of
American States under Johnson. Bunker was connected to John L.
Loeb, the Lehman kinsman who headed the investment-banking firm
of Carl M. Loeb, Rhoades & Co. Loeb placed Bunker on the board of
Curtis Publishing Co., after he obtained control of that firm for Loeb,
Rhoades. Loeb also installed Bunker’s son, John, as president of Curtis.
Furthermore, Ellsworth Bunker’s youngerbrother, Arthur, had served as director
of the Lehman Corporation, and of Lehman’s One William Street Fund until
his death in 1964.
While Bunker had served Johnson as Ambassador to
the OAS, he continued to sit on the board of the National Sugar Refining
Company. In late 1965, Bunker played a crucial role in Johnson’s
massive U.S. invasion of the Dominican Republic, an intervention
into a Dominican civil war to prevent a victory by left-wing
forces who would presumably pose a dire threat to American sugar
companies in the republic. As President Johnson’s emissary to the
Dominican Republic just after the invasion, Bunker played a decisive
role in installing the conservative Hector Garcia-Godoy as president.
Increasingly, however, the power elite became
divided over the morass of the Vietnam War. Under the blows of the Tet
offensive in January 1968, Robert McNamara had become increasingly dovish
and was replaced as Secretary of Defense by hard-liner Clark Clifford,with
McNamara moving gracefully to take charge of the World Bank. But, on
investigating the situation, Clifford too became critical of the war, and
Johnson called a crucial two-day meeting on March 22, 1968, of his highly
influential Senior Informal Advisory Group on Vietnam, known as the “Wise
Men,” made up of all his key advisors on foreign affairs.
Johnson was stunned to find that only Abe Fortas
and General Maxwell Taylor continued in the hard-line position. Arthur
Dean, Cabot Lodge, John J. McCloy, and former General Omar Bradley
took a confused middle-of-the-road position, while all the
other elite figures such as Dean Acheson, George Ball, McGeorge
Bundy, C. Douglas Dillon, and Cyrus Vance had swung around to a
firm opposition to the war.
As David Halberstam put it in his The Best and the
Brightest, these power elite leaders “lethim (Johnson) know
that the Establishment – yes, Wall Street – had turned on the war… It was
hurting the economy, dividing the country, turning the youth against the
country’s best traditions.” LBJ knew when he was licked. Only a few
days afterward, Johnson announced that he was not going to run
for re-election and he ordered what would be the beginnings of
U.S. disengagement from Vietnam.
The foreign-policy aims of the Nixon
Administration had a decided Rockefeller stamp. Secretary of State William
P. Rogers was a Wall Street lawyer who had long been active in the
liberal Dewey-Rockefeller wing of the New York Republican Party.
Indeed, Thomas E. Dewey was the main backer of Rogers for the
State Department post.
Dewey’s entire political career was beholden to
the Rockefeller interests, as was dramatically shown one election year
when, in an incident that received unaccustomed publicity, Winthrop W.
Aldrich, Rockefeller kinsman who was president of the Chase National Bank,
literally ordered Governor Dewey into his Wall Street offices and
commanded him to run for re-election. The governor, who had
previously announced his retirement into private practice, meekly
obeyed. Furthermore, Roger’s law partner, John A. Wells, had long been one
of Nelson Rockefeller’s top political aides and had served as Nelson’s
campaign manager for President in 1964.
Second-tier posts in the Nixon State Department
went to financial elite figures. Thus, the following men were successively
Under Secretaries of State (after 1972, Deputy Secretaries) in the Nixon
White House: Elliot L. Richardson, partner of a Boston Brahmin
corporate law firm and a director of the New England Trust Co., and
a man whose uncle, Henry L. Shattuck, had long been a director of the
New England Merchants National Bank and of the Mutual Life Insurance Co.
of New York.
John N. Irwin II, partner of a Wall St. law firm
(Patterson, Belknap & Webb) long associated with the Rockefeller
interests, and whose wife was a sister of the Watson brothers family ofIBM.
Kenneth Rush, president of Union Carbide Corp.,
and a director of the Bankers Trust Co. of New York. Robert S. Ingersoll,
chairman of the board of Borg-Warner Corp. and a director of the
First National Bank of Chicago.
Also, the Deputy Under-Secretary of State for
Economic Affairs under Nixon was Nathaniel Samuels, a partner in the
investment-banking house of Kuhn, Loeb & Co., and a director of the
Rockefeller-controlled International Basic Economy Corp.
Henry A. Kissinger
But of course the dominant foreign policy figure
in both the Nixon and Ford Administrations was not William Rogers but
Henry A. Kissinger, who was named national security adviser and
soon became virtually the sole force in foreign policy,
officially replacing Rogers as Secretary of State in 1973.
Kissinger was virtually “Mr. Rockefeller.” As a
Harvard political scientist, Kissinger had been discovered by John J.
McCloy, and made director of a CFR group to study the Soviet threat in the
nuclear age. He was soon made director of a special foreign policy
studies project of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, and from there
became for more than a decade Nelson Rockefeller’s chief personal
foreign policy adviser.
Only three days before accepting the Nixon
Administration post, Rockefeller gave Kissinger $50,000 to ease the fiscal
burdens of his official post. Nixon and Kissinger re-escalated the Vietnam
War by secretly bombing and then invading Cambodia in 1969 and 1970; they
couldbe sure of compliance from Ellsworth Bunker, whom Nixon retained as
Ambassador to South Vietnam until the end of the war.
Apart from the Vietnam War, the Nixon
Administration’s major foreign policy venture was the CIA-led overthrow of
the Marxist Allende regime in Chile. U.S. firms controlled about 80
percent of Chile’s copper production, and copper was by far Chile’s major
export. In the 1970 election, the CIA funnelled $1 million into
Chile in an unsuccessful attempt to defeat Allende. The new
Allende regime then proceeded to nationalize large U.S.-owned
firms, including Anaconda and Kennecott Copper and the Chile
Telephone Co., a large utility which was a subsidiary of ITT
(International Telephone and Telegraph Co.).
Under the advice of Henry Kissinger and of ITT,
the CIA funneled $8 million into Chile over the next three years, in an
ultimately successful effort to overthrow the Allende regime.
Particularly helpful in this effort was John A. McCone, the West Coast
industrialist whom Johnson had continued in charge of the CIA. Now a
board member of ITT, McCone continued in constant contact by
being named a consultant to the CIA on the Chilean question.
President Nixon continued Johnson holdover Richard Helms as head of
the CIA, and Helm’s outlook may have been influenced by the fact that
his grandfather, Gates W. McGarrah, had been the head of the Mechanics and
Metals National Bank of New York, director of Bankers Trust, and chairman
of the board of the powerful Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
Of the $8 million poured into Chile by the CIA,
over $1.5 million was allocated to Chile's largest opposition newspaper,
El Mercurio, published by wealthy businessman Augustin
Edwards. Edwards was also, not coincidentally, vice president of
Pepsico, a company headed by President Nixon's close friend Donald
M. Kendall. The transaction was arranged at a quiet breakfast
meeting in Washington, set up by Kendall, and including Edwards
and Henry Kissinger. After the successful overthrow of Allende by a
military junta in September 1973, the man who became the first Minister of
Economy, Development, and Reconstruction was Fernando Leniz, a high
official of El Mercurio who also served on the board of the Chilean
subsidiary of the Rockefeller-controlled International Basic Economy
Corporation.
Richard Nixon also established, for the first
time, diplomatic relations with Communist China. Nixon was urged to take
this step by a committee of prominent businessmen and financiers
interested in promoting trade with and investments in China. The
group included Kendall; Gabriel Hauge, chairman of Manufacturers
Hanover Trust Co.; Donald Burnham, head of Westinghouse; and David
Rockefeller, chairman of the Chase Manhattan Bank.
The first envoy to China was the veteran elite
figure and diplomat, David K.E. Bruce, who had married a Mellon, and who
had served in high diplomatic posts in every Administration since
that of Harry Truman. After Bruce became Ambassador to NATO, he
was replaced by George H.W. Bush, a Texas oil man who had
served briefly as Ambassador to the United Nations. More important than
Bush's Texas oil connections was the fact that his father,Connecticut Senator
Prescott Bush, was a partner at Brown Brothers, Harriman.
The Trilateral Commission
In July 1973 a development occurred which was to
have a critical impact on U.S. foreign – and domestic – policy.
David Rockefeller formed the Trilateral Commission, as a more eliteand
exclusive organization than the CFR, and containing
statesmen, businessmen, and intellectuals from Western Europe and Japan.
The Trilateral Commission not only studied and formulated
policy, but began to place its people in top governmental posts.
North American secretary and coordinator for the Trilaterals was
George S. Franklin, Jr., who had been for many years executive
director of the CFR. Franklin had been David Rockefeller’s roommate
in college and had married Helena Edgell, a cousin of
Rockefeller. Henry Kissinger was of course a key member of the
Trilaterals, and its staff director was Columbia University political
scientist Zbigniew Brzezinski, who was also a recently selected
director of the CFR.
President Ford continued Kissinger as his
Secretary of State and top foreign policy director. Kissinger’s leading
aide during the Ford years was Robert S. Ingersoll, Trilateralist from
Borg-Warner Corp. and the First National Bank of Chicago. In 1974,
Ingersoll was replaced as Deputy Secretary of State by Charles W.
Robinson, a businessman and Trilateralist.
Ambassador to Great Britain – and then moved to
several other posts – was Elliot Richardson, now a Trilateralist and a director of
the CFR. George Bush, Trilateralist, was retained as Ambassador to China,
and then became director of the CIA. He was replaced as Ambassador by
Thomas S. Gates, Jr., head of the Morgans’ flagship bank, Morgan Guaranty
Trust Co. Meanwhile, Robert McNamara continued to head the World Bank.
Becoming head of the Export-Import Bank in 1975 was Stephen M. DuBrul,
Jr., who had had the distinctionof being a partner of both Lehman Brothers and
Lazard Freres.
James Earl Carter and his administration were virtually
complete creatures of the Trilateral Commission. In the early 1970s, the
financial elite was looking for a likely liberal Southern governor
who might be installed in the White House. They were
considering Reubin Askew and Terry Sanford, but they settled on the
obscure Georgia governor, Jimmy Carter. They were aided in their
decision by the fact that Jimmy came highly recommended.
In the first place, it must be realized that
"Atlanta" has for decades meant Coca-Cola, the great
multi-billion dollar corporation which has long stood at the center of
Atlanta's politico-economic power elite. Jimmy Carter's long-time
attorney, close personal friend, and political mentor was Charles
Kirbo, senior partner at Atlanta's top corporate law firm of King
&Spalding.
King & Spalding had long been the general
counsel to Coca-Cola, and also to the mighty financial firm, the Trust Co.
of Georgia, long known in Atlanta as "the Coca-Cola bank."
Thelong-time head and major owner of Coca-Cola was the octogenarian Robert
W. Woodruff, who had long been highly influential in Georgia politics.
With Kirbo at his elbow, Jimmy Carter soon gained the whole-hearted
political backing of the Coca-Cola interests.
Financial contributors to Carter's race in the
1971 Democratic primary for governor were: John Paul Austin, powerful
chairman of the board of Coca-Cola; and three vice-presidents of Coke,
including Joseph W. Jones, the personal assistant to Robert
Woodruff. If Pepsi was a Republican firm, Coke had long been prominent in
the Democratic Party; thus, James A. Farley, long-time head of the
Democratic National Committee, was for thirty-five years head of the
Coca-Cola Export Company.
In 1971, Carter was introduced to David
Rockefeller by the latter’s friend J. Paul Austin, who was to become a
founding member of the Trilateral Commission. Austin was long connected
with the Morgan interests, and served as a director of the Morgan
Guaranty Trust Co., and of Morgan’s General Electric Co. Other
early political backers of Jimmy Carter were the Gambrell
brothers, David and E. Smyth, of a family which was a major
stockholder in Rockefeller-controlled Eastern Air Lines. The Gambrell
law firm, indeed, served as the general counsel for Eastern.
They, too, aided in forming the Carter-Rockefeller connection.
During the same period, Carter was also
introduced to the powerful Hedley Donovan, editor-in-chief of Time
magazine, who was also to be a founding Trilateral. Rockefeller and
Donovan liked what they saw, and Carter was also recommended to
the Trilaterals by the Atlanta Committee of the Council on
Foreign Relations.
Jimmy Carter was invited to become a member of
the Trilateral Commission shortly after it was formed, and he agreed
enthusiastically. Why did the Trilaterals appoint an obscure Georgia governor with
admittedly no knowledge of foreign affairs? Ostensibly because they wanted
to hear the views of a Southern governor. Far more likely, they were
grooming him for the Presidency and wanted to instruct him in
trilateralism. Carter took instruction well, and he wrote later of the
many happy hours he spent sitting at the feet of Trilateral executive
director and international relations expert Zbigniew Brzezinski.
What the unknown Carter needed more than even
money for his 1975–1976 campaign for President was extensive and favorable
media exposure. He received it from the Trilateral-influenced
Establishment media, led by Time’s Hedley Donovan and Trilateral
syndicatedcolumnists Joseph Kraft and Carl Rowan.
Major New York Carter backers, who served on the
Wall Street Committee for Carter or hosted gatherings on his behalf,
included Roger C. Altman, partner of Lehman Brothers, the chairman of
which, Peter G. Peterson, was a Trilateral member; banker John
Bowles; C. Douglas Dillon, of Dillon, Read, who also served as a
member of the international advisory board of the Chase Manhattan
Bank; and Cyrus Vance, a Trilateral founder and vice-chairman of
the CFR.
Furthermore, of the six national finance
directors of Jimmy Carter’s costly pre-convention race for the
Presidential nomination, three were high officials at Lehman Brothers, one
was a vice-president of Paine, Webber, another was a vice-president of
Kidder, Peabody, and a sixth was the venerable John L. Loeb, senior
partner of Loeb, Rhodes, & Co., and a Lehman by marriage. Other
prominent business fund-raisers for Carter’s election campaign
includedWalter Rothschild, who had married a member of the Warburg
family of Kuhn, Loeb & Co., and Felix Rohatyn, a partner of
Lazard Freres.
The Carter Administration proved to be Trilateral
through and through, especially in foreign affairs. Trilateral members
holding high posts in the Carter Administration included:
·
President, James
Earl Carter;
·
Vice-President Walter, (“Fritz”) Mondale;
·
National Security Adviser, Zbigniew Brzezinski;
·
Secretary of State Cyrus Vance, who was now
chairman of the board of the Rockefeller Foundation. Vance’s law firm of
Simpson, Thacher & Bartlett had long served as general
counsel for Lehman Brothers and Manufacturers Hanover Trust Co. Vance
himself served up to 1977 as a director of IBM, the New York Times Co.,
and Lehman’s One William Street Fund. It perhaps also helped Vance’s cause
that Simpson, Thacher & Bartlett was the New York general counsel for
Coca-Cola Co.
·
Deputy Secretary of State, Warren Christopher.
This Los Angeles corporate lawyer had no diplomatic experience whatever
for this high post, but his law firm of O’Melveny and Myers was a
prominent one, and he acted as the Los Angeles attorney for IBM. More important
was the fact that Christopher was the only Trilateral Commission member
from the Western half of the United States.
·
Under-Secretary of State for Economic Affairs,
Richard Cooper. This Yale professor was also on the board of the
Rockefeller-controlled J. Henry Schroder Banking Corporation.
·
Under-Secretary of State for Security Assistance,
Science, and Technology, Lucy Wilson Benson. Mrs. Benson had been a
longtime president of the League of Women Votes and highly active in
Common Cause; she was also a board member of the Lehman-orientedFederated
Department Stores.
·
Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and
Pacific Affairs, Richard Holbrooke.
·
Ambassador at Large, Henry D. Owen, of the
Brookings institution and the CFR.
·
Ambassador at Large for the Law of the Sea Treaty,
Elliot Richardson.
·
Ambassador at Large for Non-Proliferation Matters
(nuclear weapons negotiations), Gerald C. Smith, head of the U.S.
delegation at the SALT talks under Nixon, Washington attorney at
Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering, and North American Chairman of the
Trilateral Commission.
·
Ambassador to the United Nations Andrew Young.
·
Chief Disarmament Negotiator, Paul C. Warnke,
senior partner of Clark Clifford’s influential Washington law firm.
·
Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for
International Affairs, C. Fred Bergsten, of the Brookings Institution,
consultant to the Rockefeller Foundation, and a member of the
editorial board of the CFR’s prestigious quarterly journal,
Foreign Affairs.
·
Ambassador to Communist China, Leonard Woodcock,
formerly head of the United Automobile Workers. It is interesting to note
that it was under the Carter-Woodcock aegis that, one week after the
first establishment of formal ambassadorial relations with Communist
China, China signed an agreement with Coca-Cola giving it exclusive cola
sales in that country.
·
Secretary of Defense, Harold Brown. This
physicist was president of the California Institute of Technology – the
only Trilateral college president – and also served on the board
of IBM and of Schroders, Ltd., the Rockefeller-controlled
British parent company of J. Henry Schroder Bank of New York.
·
Deputy to the Director of the CIA, Harvard
Professor Robert R. Bowie.
·
Secretary of the Treasury, W. Michael Blumenthal,
head of Bendix Corp., a director of the CFR, and a trustee of the
Rockefeller Foundation.
·
Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board, Paul A.
Volcker. Volcker was named chairman by President Carter at the suggestion
of David Rockefeller. Small wonder, since Volcker had been an
executive at the Chase Manhattan Bank, and was a director of the CFR and a
trustee of the Rockefeller Foundation.
·
And finally, White House Advisor on Domestic and
Foreign Policy, Hedley Donovan, formerly editor-in-chief of Time magazine.
One of the first important Carter foreign policy
actions was the negotiation of the Panama Canal treaty, giving the Canal
to Panama, and settling the controversy in such a way that
U.S. taxpayers paid millions of dollars to the Panama government so
they could repay their very heavy loans to a number of Wall Street banks.
One co-negotiator of the treaty was Ellsworth
Bunker, who bad been engaged in fruitless negotiations since 1974. The
treaty was not concluded until Carter added as co-negotiator the
Trilateralist Sol Linowitz, a senior Washington partner of the Wall Street corporate
law firm of Coudert Brothers, and a board member of Pan-Am Airways, the
Marine Midland Bank of New York, and Time, Inc.
The Marine Midland Bank itself held part of two
bank consortium loans to Panama. Furthermore, no fewer than 32 Trilaterals
were on the boards of the 31 banks participating in a $115
million 10-year Eurodollar Panama loan issued in 1972; and 15
Trilaterals were on the boards of fourteen banks participating in the
$20 million Panama promissory note issued in the same year.
Another crucial foreign policy action of the
Carter regime was the President’s reluctant decision to admit the Shah of
Iran into the U.S., a decision that led directly to the Iran hostage
crisis and the freezing of Iranian assets in the U.S. Carter was pressured into
this move by the persistent lobbying of David Rockefeller and Henry
Kissinger, who might well have realized that a hostage crisis would ensue.
As a result, Iran was prevented from pursuing its threat of taking its
massive deposits out of Chase Manhattan Bank, which would have
caused Chase a great deal of financial difficulty. In politics,
one hand washes the other.
Kissinger, by the way, was scarcely put back in
the shadows when he left government office in 1977. He quickly became a
director of the CFR, a member of the executive committee of the Trilateral
Commission, and chairman of the International Advisory Board of the
ChaseManhattan Bank.
While Ronald Reagan’s early campaigning included
attacks on the Trilateral Commission, the Trilateralists have by now been
assured that the Reagan Administration is in safe hands.
The signal was Reagan’s choice of Trilateralist
George Bush, who had also become a director of the First International
Bank of London and Houston, as Vice-President of the United States, and
of Reagan’s post-convention reconciliation visit to Washington and to the
home of David Rockefeller.
Reagan’s most influential White House aides, like
James A. Baker, had been top campaigners for Bush for President in 1980.
The most influential corporate firm in the Reagan Administration is
the California-based Bechtel Corporation. Bechtel vice-president and
general counsel Caspar Weinberger, a Trilateralist, is Secretary of
Defense, and fellow top Bechtel executive George Shultz, former board
member of Borg-Warner Corp, General American Transportation Corp., and
Stein, Roe & Farnham Balanced Fund, is Secretary of State.
Trilateralist Arthur F. Burns, former Chairman of
the Fed, is ambassador to West Germany, Paul Volcker has been reappointed
as head of the Fed, and Henry Kissinger is at least partially back as
head of a Presidential Commission to study the question of
Central America.
It is hard to see how the Trilateralists can lose
in the 1984 elections. On the Republican ticket they have George Bush, the
heir apparent to Ronald Reagan; and in the Democratic race the two
front-runners, Walter Mondale and John Glenn, are both Trilateralists, as
is Alan Cranston of California. And, as a long shot, John Anderson of
the “National Unity Party” is also a Trilateral member. To paraphrase a
famous statement by White House aide Jack Valenti about Lyndon Johnson,
the Trilateralists and the financial
power elite can sleep well at night regardless of who wins in 1984.
Murray N. Rothbard (1926–1995)
was the author of Man, Economy, and
State, Conceived in
Liberty, What Has
Government Done to Our Money, For a New Liberty, The Case Against
the Fed, and many other books and articles. He was
also the editor – with Lew Rockwell – ofThe Rothbard-Rockwell
Report.
Murray Rothbard’s 1984 analysis of modern
American history as a great power struggle between economic elites,
between the House of Morgan and the Rockefeller interests,
culminates in the following conclusion: “the financial power elite can
sleep well at night regardless of who wins in 1984.” By the time you get
there, the conclusion seems understatedindeed, for what we have here is a
sweeping and compressed history of 20th century politics from a
power elite point of view. It represents a small and highly
specialized sample of Rothbard’s vast historical knowledge coming
together with a lifetime devoted to methodological individualism in
the social sciences. It appeared first in 1984, in the thick of the Reagan
years, in a small financial publication called World Market Perspective.
It was printed for a larger audience by the Center for Libertarian
Studies in 1995, and appears in 2005 online for the first time.
Theoreticians Left and Right are constantly
referring to abstract “forces” when they examine and attempt to explain
historical patterns. Applying the principle of methodological
individualism – which attributes all human action to individual
actors – and the economic principles of the Austrian School, Rothbard
formulated a trenchant overview of the Americanelite and the history of the
modern era.
Rothbard’s analysis flows, first, from the basic
principles of Austrian economics, particularly the Misesian analysis of
banking and the origin of the business cycle. This issue is alsodiscussed
and elaborated on in one of his last books, The Case Against
the Fed (Mises Institute, 1995). Here, the author
relates the history of how the Federal Reserve System came to be foisted
on the unsuspecting American people by a high-powered alliance of banking
interests. Rothbard’s economic analysis is clear, concise, and
wide-ranging, covering the nature of money, the genesis of
government paper money, the inherent instability (and essential
fraudulence) of fractional reserve banking, and the true causes of
the business cycle.
As Rothbard explains in his economic writings,
the key is in understanding that money is a commodity, like any
other, and thus subject to the laws of the market. A
government-granted monopoly in this, the very lifeblood of the economic
system, is a recipe for inflation, a debased currency – and the
creation of a permanent plutocracy whose power is virtuallyunlimited.
In the present essay, as in The Case Against the Fed,
it is in the section on the history of the movement to establish the
Federal Reserve System that the Rothbardian power elite analysis comes
into full and fascinating play. What is striking about this piece is the
plethora of details. Rothbard’s argument is so jam-packed with facts
detailing the social, economic, and familial connections of the burgeoning
Money Power, that we need to step back and look at it in the light of
Rothbardian theory, specifically Rothbard’s theory of class analysis.
Rothbard eagerly reclaimed the concept of class
analysis from the Marxists, who expropriated it from the French
theorists of laissez-faire. Marx authored a plagiarized,
distorted, and vulgarized version of the theory based on the
Ricardian labor theory of value. Given this premise, he came up
with a class analysis pitting workers against owners.
One of Rothbard’s many great contributions to the
cause of liberty was to restore the original theory, which pitted the
people against the State. In the Rothbardian theory of class struggle,the
government, including its clients and enforcers, exploits and enslaves the
productive classes through taxation, regulation, and perpetual war.
Government is an incubus, a parasite, incapable of producing anything in
its own right, and instead feeds off the vital energies and productive
ability of the producers.
This is the first step of a fully-developed
libertarian class analysis. Unfortunately, this is where the thought
processes of all too many alleged libertarians come to a grinding halt.
It is enough, for them, to know the State is the Enemy, as if it were an
irreducible primary.
As William Pitt put it in 1770, “There is
something behind the throne greater than the king himself.” Blind to
the real forces at work on account of their methodological
error, Left-libertarians are content to live in a world of
science fiction and utopian schemes, in which they are no threat to
the powers that be, and are thus tolerated and at times even encouraged.
The Left-libertarian failure to take the analytical
process one step further is, in many cases, a failure of nerve. For
it is clear, given libertarian theory and the economic insights of the
Austrian School, where the next step leads. No empirical evidence is
necessary, at this point (although that will come later, and in spades);
the truth can be deduced from pure theory, specifically the Austrian
theory of the nature of money and banking, and the Misesian analysis
of the origin of the business cycle.
This deduction was brilliantly and colorfully made
in the first issue of The Journal of Libertarian Studies
(Winter 1977), by two students of Rothbard, Walter E. Grinder
and John Hagel III, in “Toward a Theory of State
Capitalism: Ultimate Decision-Making and Class Structure.”
While a pure free market would necessarily
prevent the development of a banking monopoly, “however, the market system
does concentrate entrepreneurial activity and decision-makingwithin the
capital market because of the considerable benefits which are rendered by
a certain degree of specialization.”
This “specialized capital market, by the very
nature of its integrative role within the market system, will emerge as a
strategic locus of ultimate decision-making.” Given that some
individuals will choose the political means over the economic,
some of these great fortunes will utilize their tremendous
resources to cartelize the market and insulate themselves againstrisk. The
temptation for bankers in particular to wield the power of the State to
their benefit is very great because it permits banks to inflate their
asset base systematically. The creation of assets made possible by these
measures to a great extent frees the banking institutions from the constraints imposed
by the passive form of ultimate decision-making exercised by their
depositors. It thereby considerably strengthens the ultimate
decision-making authority held by banks vis–vis their depositors. The
inflationary trends resulting from the creation of assets tend to increase
the ratio of external financing to internal financing in large
corporations and,as a consequence, the ultimate decision-making power
of banking institutions increase over the activities of
industrial corporations.
The Austrian insight focuses on the key role
played by the central banks in generating the distortion of market signals
that leads to periodic booms and busts, the dreaded business cycle
which is always blamed on the inherent contradictions of unfettered capitalism.
But in fact this capitalism is anything but
unfettered. (Try starting your own private bank.) The last thing
American bankers want is an unfettered banking system. Rothbard
not only traces the original market distortion that gives rise to the
business cycle, but also identifies the source (and chief beneficiaries)
of this distortion. It was Mises who pointed out that government
intervention in the economy invariably leads to yet more intervention in
order to “fix” the havoc wreaked – and there is a certain logic
in the fact that it was the original culprits who decided to “fix”
the distortions and disruptions caused by their policies with further
assaults on the market mechanism. As Grinder and Hagel put it:
In the U.S., this intervention initially involved
sporadic measures, both at the federal and state level, which
generated inflationary distortion in the monetary supply and
cyclicaldisruptions of economic activity. The disruptions
which accompanied the business cycle were a major factor in
the transformation of the dominant ideology in the U.S. from a
general adherence to laissez-faire doctrines to an ideology of political
capitalism which viewed the state as a necessary instrument for the
rationalization and stabilization of an inherently unstable economic
order.
Capitalists as Enemies of Capitalism
This explains the strange historical fact,
recounted at length and in detail by Rothbard, that the biggest
capitalists have been the deadliest enemies of true capitalism.
For virtually all of the alleged social “reforms” of the past fifty
years were pushed not only by “idealistic” Leftists,but by the very corporate
combines caricatured as the top-hatted, pot-bellied “economic royalists”
of Wall Street.
The neoconservative Right depicts the battle
against Big Government as a two-sided Manichean struggle between the
forces of light (that is, of capitalism) and the remnants of
largely discredited Leftist elites. But Rothbard’s historical
analysis reveals a much richer, more complex pattern: instead
of being two-sided, the struggle for liberty pits at least three
sides, each against the other. For the capitalists, as John T. Flynn,
Albert Jay Nock, and Frank Chodorov all pointed out, were never for
capitalism. As Nock put it:
It is one of the few amusing things in our rather
stodgy world that those who today are behaving most tremendously
about collectivism and the Red menace are the very ones who
have cajoled, bribed, flattered and bedeviled the State into taking
each and every one of the successive steps that lead straight to collectivism.
["Impostor Terms," Atlantic Monthly, February 1936.]
The New Deal economic policy was, as Rothbard
demonstrated, prefigured by Herbert Hoover, champion of big
business, and foreshadowed in the reforms of the Progressive era.As the
revisionist economic historians, such as Gabriel Kolko, have shown, those
who regulated the great industries in the name of progressive “reform”
were recruited from the very cartels and trusts they were created to tame.
And of course the monopolists didn’t mind being
tamed, so long as their competitors were tamed (if not eliminated).
Every giant leap forward of economic planning and centralization– central
banking, the welfare state, “civil rights,” and affirmative action – was
supported if not initiated by the biggest and most politically powerful
business interests in the country. The House of Morgan, the Rockefellers,
and the Kuhn-Loebs must take their place alongside the First, Second,
and Third Internationals as the historic enemies of liberty.
Giant multinational corporations, and their
economic satellites, in alliance with governments and the big banks, are
in the process of extending their influence on a global scale: they
dream of a world central bank, global planning, and an international welfare
state, with American troops policing the world to guarantee their profit
margins.
After the long battle to create a central bank in
the U.S., the high priests of high finance finally seized and
consolidated control of domestic economic policy. It only remained forthem
to extend their dominance internationally, and for this purpose they
created the Council on Foreign Relations, and, later, the Trilateral
Commission.
These two groups have been seized upon by the new
populist Right as the virtual embodiments of the Power Elite, and
rightly so. It is only by reading Rothbard, however, that this
insight is placed in its proper historical perspective. For the fact
of the matter is that, as Rothbard shows, the CFR/ Trilateralist network
is merely the latest incarnation of a trend deeply rooted in modern
American history. Long before the founding of the CFR or the Trilateral
Commission, there was a power elite in this country; that elite will
likely endure long after those organizations are gone or
transmuted into something else. Rothbard’s unmasking of the
historical and economic roots of this trend is vital in
understanding that this is not a “conspiracy” centered in the CFR
and the Trilateralist groups, as such, but an ideological
trend traditionally centered in the Northeast, among the
upper classes, and deeply rooted in American history.
I put the word “conspiracy” in quotes because it
has become the favorite swearword of the Respectable Right and
the “extremist”-baiting Left. If it is conspiracy-mongering to
believe that human beings engage in purposeful activity to achieve their
economic, political, and personal goals, then rational men and women must
necessarily plead guilty. The alternative is to assert that human action
is purposeless, random, and inexplicable. History, in this view, is a
series of discontinuous accidents.
Yet it would be inaccurate to call the
Rothbardian world view a “conspiracy theory.” To say that the House of
Morgan was engaged in a “conspiracy” to drag the U.S. into World
War I, when indeed it openly used every stratagem, every lever both
economic and political, to push us into “the war to end all wars,” seems
woefully inadequate. This was not some secret cabal meeting in a
soundproof corporate boardroom, but a “conspiracy” of ideas openly and
vociferously expressed. (On this point, please note and underscore
Rothbard’s analysis of the founding of The New Republic as
the literary flagship of “the growing alliance for war and
statism” between the Morgan interests and liberal intellectuals – and
isn’t it funny how some things never change?)
A conspiracy theory attributes virtually all
social problems to a single monolithic agency. Radical feminism, which
attributes all the evil in the world to the existence of men, is aclassic
conspiracy theory; the paranoid views of the ex-Communists in the
conservative movement, who were obsessed with destroying their
ex-comrades, was another.
But the complexity and subtlety of the
Rothbardian analysis, backed up by the sheer mass of rich historical
detail, sets Rothbard on an altogether different and higher plane.
Here there is no single agency, no omnipotent central committee that
issues directives, but a multiplicity of interest groups and factions
whose goals are generally congruent.
In this milieu, there are familial, social, and
economic connections, as well as ideological complicity, and none is
better than Rothbard at ferreting out and unraveling these
biographical details. Taken together, the author’s small and
studied brushstrokes paint a portrait of a ruling class whose
ruthlessness is surpassed only by its brazen disloyalty to the nation.
It is a portrait that remains unchanged, in its
essentials, to this day. Wall Street,
Banks, and American Foreign Policy was
written and published in 1984, during the Reagan years.
Reagan started out by denouncing the power elite
and specifically the CFR and the Trilateralists, but wound up with that
epitome of the Establishment, Skull-&-Bonesman George Bush as his
vice president and successor.
Bush is a longtime CFR director, and
Trilateralist; most of his major cabinet officers, including his chairman
of the joint chiefs, Colin Powell, were CFR members. The Clinton
administration is similarly afflicted, from the President
(CFR/Trilateral) on down through Donna Shalala (CFRJ Trilateral) and
George Stephanopoulos (CFR), with the CFR honeycombed (as
usual) throughout the State Department. In addition to Secretary of
State Warren Christopher, other CFR members in the Clinton cabinet include
Laura Tyson, chairman of the Council of Economic advisors, Treasury
Secretary Robert Rubin; InteriorSecretary Bruce Babbitt, HUD honcho Henry
Cisneros; and Alice Rivlin, 0MB director.
The other side of the aisle is equally co-opted
at the leadership level, as vividly dramatized by Gingrich’s retreat
before the power and majesty of Henry Kissinger. One
naturally expects cowardice from politicians, but the indictment
also includes what passes for the intellectual leaders of the Republican
free-market “revolution.”
There is a certain mentality that, no matter how
convincing the evidence, would never even consider the argument put
forward in Wall Street, Banks, and American Foreign Policy. Thisattitude
stems from a particular kind of cowardice. It is a fear, first of all, of
not being listened to, a dread of consigning oneself to the role of
Cassandra, the ancient Greek prophetess who was granted the power of
foresight by the gods, with but a single limitation: that none wouldever
heed her warnings. It is far easier, and so much more lucrative, to play
the role of court historian.
This is a
role the author of this scintillating pamphlet never could have played,
even if he had tried. For the truth (or, at least, the search for it) is
so much more interesting than the official histories and the conventional
wisdom of the moment. The sheer pleasure Rothbard took in
unearthing the truth, in carrying out his vocation as a true
scholar, is evident not only on every page of the present work
but throughout his 28 books and thousands of articles and speeches.
Rothbard was not afraid of sharing Cassandra’s
fate because, in the first place, truth is a value in its own right, and
ought to be upheld for its own sake. Second, the truth has a way of
eventually getting out, in spite of the most strenuous efforts to suppress
it.
No comments:
Post a Comment