A private, purported philanthrophic foundation based at 420 Fifth Avenue, NYC established by the six-generation Rockefeller family – namely by Standard Oil owner John D. Rockefeller, Sr., his son John D. Rockefeller Jr., and Senior’s principal oil and gas business and philanthropic advisor, Frederick Taylor Gates – in NY on May 14, 1913, when its charter was formally accepted by the State Legislature. Its stated mission is “promoting the well-being of humanity throughout the world,” however its actual mission is, and has long been, the funding of deep state endeavors. Known for his bold statement that “Competition is a sin“, Rockefeller would quickly get to work under the guise of philanthropy to create monopolies such as education and medicine while also funding new world order endeavors such as the National Council of Churches (used to infuse communist ideology and work towards a world religion), the United Nations, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Kinsey Institute responsible for the moral decay of society, the global warming hoax, the changing of the tuning frequency of music, and especially eugenics and sterilization methods used for population reduction.
The Takeover of Medicine and Big Pharma
In the early half of the 20th century, petrochemical giants organized a coup on the medical research facilities, hospitals and universities. The Rockefeller family sponsored research and donated sums to universities and medical schools which had drug based research. They further extended this policy to foreign universities and medical schools where research was drug based through their “International Education Board”. Establishments and research which were were not drug based were refused funding and soon dissolved in favor of the lucrative pharmaceutical industry. In 1939 a “Drug Trust” alliance was formed by the Rockefeller empire and the German chemical company IG Farben (Bayer). After World War II, IG Farben was dismantled but later emerged as separate corporations within the alliance. Well known companies included General Mills, Kellogg, Nestle, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Procter and Gamble, Roche and Hoechst (Sanofi-Aventis). The Rockefeller empire, in tandem with Chase Manhattan Bank (now JP Morgan Chase), owns over half of the pharmaceutical interests in the United States. It is the largest drug manufacturing combine in the world. Since WWII, the pharmaceutical industry has steadily netted increasing profits to become the world’s second largest manufacturing industry after the arms industry.
The original Rockefeller foundation was established in 1901 and was called The Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research. It was set up as part of Lee’s PR program to clean up the Rockefeller image. Doubtless the Rockefeller money has done much good in the field of public health and scientific research-although there are some who will give you a heated argument even here.*
The RF was later formed in 1910 and issued a charter in 1913 with the help of Rockefeller millions. Subsequently, the foundation placed it’s own “nominees” in federal health agencies and set the stage for the “reeducation” of the public. A compilation of magazine advertising reveals that as far back as 1948, larger American drug companies spent a total sum of $1,104,224,374 for advertising. Of this sum, Rockefeller-Morgan interests (which went entirely to Rockefeller after Morgan’s death) controlled about 80%. 1
The first Congressional Committees to attempt to an investigation of how the Rockefeller’s and Carnegie’s were using their foundation for complete domination of the United States was the Cox Committee, created in 1952 under the leadership of Congressman Eugene E.Cox, a Democrat from Georgia. Warren Weaver notes in U. S, Philanthropic Foundations that the official purpose of this Committee was to determine which
“foundations and organizations are using their resources for purposes other than the purposes for which they were established, and especially to determine which such foundations and organizations are using their resources for un-American and subversive activities or for purposes not in the interest or tradition of the United States.”
“Liberal” Democrats in control of Congress first delayed the appropriation of funds for the Cox Committee, then gave it only six months to conclude an investigation that would properly require several years. Cox hoped to expose foundation fraud and the subversives, behind it; but, as Dwight MacDonald has pointed out, ” the strategy misfired, because the Democratic leaders, who were still in control of the House, boxed the impeccably Americanistic chairman with less dedicated colleagues.” It was all-out war-with billions involved.
The first battle ended with a serious casualty Congressman Cox fell gravely ill during the investigation and died [surely a “fortunate coincidence” for the Rockefeller, Ford, and Carnegie Foundations..Ken]. Without his leadership, the Committee Report became a whitewash. One member of that Committee refused to be a party to the Cover up. He was Congressman Carroll Reece of Tennessee, a former Chairman of the Republican National Committee and one of Robert Taft’s campaign managers. Reece promptly demanded a new investigation.
The Rockefeller Establishment was frantic that its sacred cows might be butchered. The Washington Post, closely tied to the Rockefellers, never before known for its sense of public frugality, screamed that the Reece probe was “wholly unnecessary and was stupidly wasteful of public funds.”
Because of limited time, staff, and money, the Reece Committee was forced to concentrate its investigation on various Rockefeller and Carnegie foundations, and on the huge Ford Foundation. The Committee found that one of the first areas into which John D. invested his money was education. Daddy Oilbucks put his assistant, Fred Gates, in charge of his General Education Board. Gates tipped the Rockefeller philosophy on education in the Board’s Occasional Paper No.1;
” In our dreams we have limitless resources and the people yield themselves with perfect docility to our molding hands. The present educational conventions fade from our minds, and unhampered by tradition, we work our own good will upon a grateful and responsive rural folk. “
Later, the General Education Board expanded horizons to take into its “molding hands” the city folk at well. To this end the Rockefeller and Carnegie foundations, which often had interlocking directorates and many times acted in unison, began in the early Thirties to back John Dewey and his Marxist educationalists with enormous amounts of money.
As Rene Wormser observes:
“Research and experimental stations were established at selected universities, notably Columbia, Stanford, and Chicago. Here some of the worst mischief in recent education-was born. In these Rockefeller-and-Carnegie established vineyards worked many of the principal characters in the story of the suborning of American education. Here foundations nurtured some of the most ardent academic advocates of upsetting the American system and supplanting it with a Socialist state…. “
The Carnegie and Rockefeller foundations had jumped into the financing of education and the social sciences with both Left feet. For example, the foundations (principally Carnegie and Rockefeller) stimulated two-thirds of the total endowment funding of all institutions of higher learning in America during the first third of this century. During this period the Carnegie-Rockefeller complex supplied 20% of the total income of colleges and universities and became in fact, if not in name, a sort of U.S. Ministry of Education. The result was a sharp Socialist-Fascist turn. As Rene Wormser, Counsel for the Reece Committee, reports:
“A very powerful complex of foundations and allied organizations has developed over the years to exercise a high degree of control over education. Part of this complex, and ultimately responsible for it, are the Rockefeller and Carnegie groups of foundations. “
These foundations were, by way of grants amounting to hundreds of millions of dollars, responsible for the nationwide acceptance of avowed socialist John Dewey’s theories of ‘progressive’ education and permissiveness -the products of which have been marching on our college campuses for the past several decades.
Traditionalist teachers, who had been strongly resisting Deweyism, were swamped by education propagandists backed with a flood of Rockefeller-Carnegie dollars. At the same time the National Education Association, the country’s chief education lobby, was also financed largely by the Rockfellers and Carnegie foundations.
It, too, threw its considerable weight behind the Dewey philosophies. As an NEA report maintained in 1934:
“A dying laissez-faire must be completely destroyed and all of us, including the “owners,” must be subjected to a large degree of social control.”
Since America’s public school system was decentralized, the foundations had concentrated on influencing schools of education (particularly Columbia, the spawning ground for Deweyism), and on financing the writing of textbooks which were subsequently adopted nationwide. These foundation-roduced textbooks were so heavily slanted in favor of socialism that Wormser concluded:
“It is difficult to believe that the Rockefeller Foundation and the National Education Association could have supported these textbooks. But the fact is that Rockefeller financed them and the N.E.A. promoted them very widely.”
Little wonder that Reece Committee Counsel Wormser says evidence compiled during and after the Reece investigation of foundations:
“…leads one to the conclusion that there was, indeed something in the nature of an actual conspiracy among certain leading educators in the United States to bring about socialism through the use of our school systems… “
Congressman Cox had denounced these foundations for precisely these reasons. He named in particular the Rockefeller Foundation, -whose funds have been used to finance individuals and organizations whose business it has been to get communism into the private and public schools of the country, to talk down America and play up Russia….
It goes without saying that, by controlling the textbooks, the progressivists gained an open sesame to the minds of millions of students in the government schools. As John T. Flynn observed, it wasn’t necessary to poison every glass of water coming out of every tap in a given community. It was necessary only to drop one cup of poison into the reservoir. So successful was this conspiracy that by June of 1955, the Progressive Education Association which had been founded by John Dewey officially disbanded. Dr. H. Gordon Hullfish, the Association’s president, explained:
” Founded in 1919 the PEA was a protest movement against traditional education, based in large part upon the philosophy of John Dewey. One reason for PEA’s end is that many of the practices. It has advocated have been adopted by the nation’s schools.”
Those who control education will over a period of several generations control a nation. The Rockefellers have for five or six decades been a controlling influence in the direction of American education. While education is a powerful tool for controlling the thinking and outlook of people, it is not the only means.
Destroy Religion, Form One World Religion
Religion is also an important molder of public opinion. For many years the Rockefeller Dynasty bankrolled the Union Theological Seminary of New York, which has done so much to turn the clergy towards state socialism fascism, and to destroy the tenets of traditional Christianity. The highly influential seminary is known for turning out “Christian” Communists.
The family’s chief religious philanthropy for a number of years was the notorious Federal Council of Churches, which was pronounced by US Naval Intelligence in 1936 as one of the most dangerous, subversive organizations in the country. According to Naval Intelligence:
“It is a large radical -pacifist- organization, and probably represents 20,000,000 Protestants in the United States. However, its leadership consists of a small group which dictates its policies. It is always extremely active in any matters against national defense.”
In its many official pronouncements, the Federal Council attacked free enterprise, capitalism and the American way of life, and boldly advocated Socialism. In an official report in 1932,the Federal Council stated:
” The Christian ideal calls for hearty support of a planned economic system…. It demands that cooperation shall replace competition as a fundamental method.”
At a full meeting in Indianapolis in December,1932, the Federal Council adopted unanimously this Socialist creed:
“The churches should stand for social planning and control of the credit and monetary system and the economic processes. “
The following year,1933, the Council officially declared:
“The Christian conscience can be satisfied with nothing less than the complete substitution of motives of mutual helpfulness and good will for the motive of private gain.”
The Federal Council was so flagrantly a mouthpiece for the gospel according to St. Stalin that it was forced to change its name. It became the National Council of Churches which today claims to represent some forty million Protestants. While less prone to praising the Soviets as openly as its predecessor, the NCC has repeatedly been denounced by fundamentalist Christian organizations for its slavish adherence to promoting radical socialism and its lovey-dovey attitude toward Moscow. Today, after forty years of assiduous anti-Americanism and the promotion of totalitarian government at home and abroad, the NCC still enjoys the largesse of the Family Rockefeller. Its past president J. Irwin Miller is a perennial Rockefeller front man and a trustee of the Ford Foundation.*
*The NCC has donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to buy arms for revolutionary Communist groups in Africa. These arms are used by the Communists to slay Christians, while thousands of American clergymen look the other way. If this is not murder by proxy, what is it?
Through its multiple foundations the Rockefeller family invested its money where it would have the most influence and do the family the most good. And by far the chief beneficiaries of its “charities” have been the Rockefellers.
As the World Health Organizations admits in its 2001 technical report Research on the Development of Methods of Fertility Regulation, research into both “injectable Immunocontraceptives” and implantable ones has been long in the making, coordinated and developed in collaboration between the Rockefeller Foundation and the World Health Organization: “The development of a totally new method of contraception, based on a controlled and time-limited immune response to reproduction-specific molecules, has been the subject of extensive investigation supported by a number of international and national agencies for several decades”, the document reads. “It was recognized that the development of this totally novel approach to contraception was a long-term, high-risk endeavour but the perceived advantages of, and potential demands for, a safe and effective immunocontraceptive—free of the metabolic and other side-effects associated with long-acting methods based on steroid hormones—were considered more than sufficient to justify the effort and investment.”
Rockefeller Foundation minion Max Mason, who acted as president in the mid-1930s, on multiple occasions expressed his master’s desire for an “anti-hormone” that would reduce fertility worldwide. Now keep in mind, this is more than 35 years before the Foundation actually mentioned funding “anti-fertility vaccines” in subsequent annual reports from 1969 onward.
By the mid-1930s, Mason of the Rockefeller Foundation thought that “the ultimate solution of the problem [of birth control] may well lie in the studies of endocrinology, particularly antihormones.” The Foundation’s 1934 annual report states: “The Rockefeller Foundation has decided to concentrate its present effort in the natural sciences on the field of modern experimental biology, with special interest in such topics as endocrinology, nutrition, genetics, embryology, problems centering about the reproductive process, psychobiology, general and cellular physiology, biophysics, and biochemistry.” “(…) research work is being conducted on the physiology of reproduction in the monkey. This work was begun at the Johns Hopkins University in 1921, and since 1923 has been continued at the University of Rochester. It involves observational and experimental studies of the reproductive cycle in certain species of the higher primates, in which this cycle closely resembles that of the human species. The effect of the various interrelated reproductive hormones is being studied.” In the annual report of the previous year (1933), the Foundation stresses the fact that work on the reproductive hormones of primates serves to experiment on man in the future: “(…) much work has been done in the formulation and solution of basic problems in the general biology and physiology of sex in organisms other than man. It was essential that this fundamental work on infra-man pave the way for that on man.” In the book Discipling Reproduction by Adele E. Clarke, the roots of Rockefeller-funded “anti-hormones” is being described in some detail, pointing out that the family’s ambitions to control man’s fertility date back even further than the 1930s. Clarke writes: “On a cold morning in 1921, George Washington Corner, a physician and fledgling reproductive scientist, awoke in Baltimore to discover that it was snowing.” “By 1929”, Clarke writes a bit further on, “Corner had mapped out the hormonal action of progesterone, an essential actor in the menstrual cycle and subsequently an actor in birth control pills.”
“To the University of Rochester, for research on the physiology of reproduction under the direction of Dr. G. W. Corner during the three year period beginning July 1, 1935, and ending June 30, 1938, there has been appropriated the sum of $9,900. Dr. Corner’s activities are concentrated on a study of the oestrus cycle, using monkeys as the experimental animals. A colony of about thirty monkeys has been maintained, and experiments have furnished information on the normal histology of the reproductive cycle, the time of ovulation, the relation of ovulation to menstruation and other anatomically detectable correlations of the oestrus cycle. Work is continuing on two main lines: normal sex reproduction in the monkey, including the histology of ovary and uterus, and, secondly, the effects of the ovarian hormone.” Again, never forget that the Foundation in 1933 stated outright that “It was essential that this fundamental work on infra-man pave the way for that on man.” Another essential problem which arises, of course, is how exactly the funding-mechanism worked by which Corner’s research could be made ready for mass-consumption. Clarke mentions that officially the National Research Council, an arm of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), was the institute responsible for the task of doing so. More specific: the Committee for Research in Problems of Sex (CRPS): “The NRC itself was founded in 1916 as an agency to inventory research toward enhanced military preparedness.” “The NRC”, states the author, “was a prestigious organization from its inception, thanks to its early association with the NAS, the Carnegie Corporation, and the Rockefeller Foundation. Kohler (1991:109) has argued that the NRC essentially served as an intermediary between the foundations and scientists in the interwar years.(…). The NRC/CRPS itself was funded almost exclusively by Rockefeller monies, initially through the Bureau of Social Hygiene and, after 1931, through the Rockefeller Foundation.” On the subject of so-called “current immunological contraceptive research”, Clarke channels Rockefeller-president Max Mason: “Other lines of current immunological contraceptive research continue to seek what, during the 1930s, Max Mason of the Rockefeller Foundation called “anti-hormones”: vaccines to block hormones needed for very early pregnancy and a vaccine to block the hormone needed for the surface of the egg to function properly.” In a February 1934 “progress report” written by Warren Weaver (director of the Natural Sciences Division of the Rockefeller Foundation) once again underlined the endgame: “Can man gain an intelligent control of his own power? Can we develop so sound and extensive a genetics that we can hope to breed, in the future, superior men? Can we obtain enough knowledge of physiology and psychobiology of sex so that man can bring this pervasive, highly important, and dangerous aspect of life under rational control?”
In its 1968 yearly report, the Rockefeller Foundation acknowledged funding the development of so-called “anti-fertility vaccines” and their implementation on a mass-scale. From page 51 onward we read: “(…) several types of drugs are known to diminish male fertility, but those that have been tested have serious problems of toxicity. Very little work is in progress on immunological methods, such as vaccines, to reduce fertility, and much more research is required if a solution is to be found here.” The possibility of using vaccines to reduce male fertility was something that needed to be investigated further, according to the Rockefeller Foundation, because both the oral pill and the IUD were not suitable for mass-scale distribution:
“We are faced with the danger that within a few years these two “modern” methods, for which such high hopes have been held, will in fact turn out to be impracticable on a mass scale.” The possibility of administrating hormone preparations to reduce fertility was also mentioned, although- states the report- they have been known to “cause bleeding problems, which may limit their usefulness.” “A semipermanent or renewable subcutaneous implant of these hormones has been suggested, but whether or not the same difficulties would result has not been determined.”
“There are an estimated five million women among America’s poverty and near-poverty groups who need birth control service (…). The unchecked fertility of the indigent does much to perpetuate poverty, undereducation, and underemployment, not only in urban slums, but also in depressed rural areas.” It wasn’t long before all the Foundation’s efforts began to have effect. In its annual report of 1988, The RF was happy to report the progress made by the Foundation’s Population Division in the field of anti-fertility vaccines: “India’s National Institute of Immunology successfully completed in 1988 the first phase of trials with three versions of an anti-fertility vaccine for women. Sponsored by the government of India and supported by the Foundation, the trials established that with each of the tested vaccines, at least one year of protection against pregnancy could be expected, based on the levels of antibodies formed in response to the immunization schedule.” In its 1997 review of anti-fertility vaccines, Indian based International Centre for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology didn’t forget to acknowledge its main benefactor: “The work on LHRH and HCG vaccines was supported by research grants of The Rockefeller Foundation, (…).” In the 1990s the work on anti-fertility vaccines went in overdrive, especially in third-world nations, as did the funding provided by the deep pockets of the Rockefeller Foundation. At the same time, the target-population of the globalists- women- began to stir uncomfortably with all this out-in-the-open talk of population reduction and vaccines as a means to achieve it. Betsy Hartman, Director of the Population and Development Program at Hampshire College, Massachusetts and “someone who believes strongly in women’s right to safe, voluntary birth control and abortion”, is no supporter of the anti-fertility vaccine, as brought into being by the Rockefeller Foundation. She explains in her essay Population control in the new world order: “Although one vaccine has been tested on only 180 women in India, it is being billed there as ‘safe, devoid of any side effects and completely reversible’. The scientific community knows very well that such assertions are false – for instance, many questions still remain about the vaccine’s long-term impact on the immune system and menstrual cycle. There is also evidence on film of women being denied information about the vaccine in clinical trials. Nevertheless, the vaccine is being prepared for large-scale use.”
The 1985 Rockefeller Foundation’s annual report underlined its ongoing dedication towards finding good use for the anti-fertility substance “gossypol”, or C30H30O8 – as the description reads. Indeed, gossypol, a toxic polyphenol derived from the cotton plant, was identified early on in the Foundation’s research as an effective sterilant. The question was, how to implement or integrate the toxic substance into crops. “Another long-term interest of the Foundation has been gossypol, a compound that has been shown to have an antifertility effect in men, By the end of 1985, the Foundation had made grants totaling approximately $1.6 million in an effort to support and stimulate scientific investigations on the safety and efficacy of gossypol.”
In the 1986 Rockefeller Foundation annual report, the organization admits funding research into the use of fertility-reducing compounds in relation to food for “widespread use”: “Male contraceptive studies are focused on gossypol, a natural substance extracted from the cotton plant, and identified by Chinese researchers as having an anti-fertility effect on men. Before widespread use can be recommended, further investigation is needed to see if lowering the dosage can eliminate undesirable side-effects without reducing its effectiveness as a contraceptive. The Foundation supported research on gossypol’s safety, reversibility and efficacy in seven different 1986 grants.”
The question that is racing through the mind of most readers at this point undoubtedly is why the Rockefellers, considered the world’s foremost capitalists, spent hundreds of millions of dollars financing their alleged enemies, the socialists? One would assume that, since the Rockefellers are thought of as capitalists, they would have used their fortune to foster the philosophy of individual liberty. But, just the opposite is true. We have been unable to find a single project in the history of the Rockefeller foundations which promotes free enterprise. Indeed, except in the fields of health and science (and some of these grants are highly questionable) almost all of the Rockefeller grants have been used directly or indirectly to promote economic and social collectivism, i.e., Socialism-Fascism.
Reasonable men ask what could motivate the Rockefellers to finance collectivist efforts which seem so totally at odds with their own interests? They forget that John D. Rockefeller was a Machiavellian who boasted that he hated competition. Whenever he could, Rockefeller used the government to promote his own interests and to hinder his competitors. Monopoly capitalism is impossible unless you have a government with the power to strangle would-be competitors.
The easiest way to control or eliminate competitors is not to best them in the marketplace, but to use the power of government to exclude them from the marketplace. If you wish to control commerce, banking, transportation, and natural resources on a national level, you must control the federal government. If you and your clique wish to establish worldwide monopolies, you must control a World Government. The Rockefellers are not humanitarians; they are power-seeking Machiavellians. They are using. their phony philanthropy as a guise for seizing power on a magnitude that would make old John D. Sr. proud.
Source: Gary Allen’s book, ‘The Rockefeller Files‘
Chronological History of Events Involving the Rockefeller Foundation
The German Club of Clear Words Report: Exposes the network of individuals and organizations responsible for the COVID scam
Rockefeller Foundation Releases ‘Reset the Table’ Report, part of “The Great Reset” Describing Radical Transformation of Our Food System
Report: ‘Nonpartisan’ Group Aiding Lawyers for ‘Whistleblower’ Tied to Democrats, Far-Left Organizations