Another outfit like the CFR, only more “elite” and more international, is the Trilateral Commission, founded in 1973 by the late globalist and self-described conspirator for a one-world order David Rockefeller. The late Rockefeller, of course, also played a leading role in the CFR, becoming a member in 1941 and serving as chairman of the board from 1970 until 1985, and an honorary chairman until his death in 2017 at age 101. As with so many Deep State tentacles, the Rockefellers — and especially David — have been crucial to the Trilateral Commission. Indeed, David Rockefeller was appointed the first chairman.
Aside from Rockefeller, who in his memoirs boasted of “conspiring” with a “secret cabal” against the best interests of America to form a “one world” order, the other key figure behind the Trilateral Commission was Zbigniew Brzezinski, who at the time was at Columbia University’s Russian Studies department. Eventually, he became an advisor to Rockefeller, the North America director of the Trilateral Commission, and the national security advisor to President Jimmy Carter. He also was a key player in arming the jihadist “mujaheddin” holy warriors in Afghanistan, whose descendants the U.S. military is currently battling.
Decades ago, Brzezinski’s writings greatly impressed Rockefeller — so much so that Rockefeller decided to take Brzezinski under his wing. Among Brzezinski’s ideas that caught Rockefeller’s attention were those outlined in his 1970 book Between Two Ages: America’s Role in the Technetronic Era. In the book, Brzezinski argued, in essence, that America was “obsolete,” and that a new world order needed to be created to take the place of the previous U.S.-dominated system. Rockefeller, apparently, agreed.
While Brzezinski’s book acknowledged some of the problems in the Soviet Union, it also showered praise on Marxism. “Marxism represents a further vital and creative stage in the maturing of man’s universal vision,” he wrote. “Marxism is simultaneously a victory of the external, active man over the inner, passive man and a victory of reason over belief: it stresses man’s capacity to shape his material destiny — finite and defined as man’s only reality — and it postulates the absolute capacity of man to truly understand his reality as a point of departure for his active endeavors to shape it. To a greater extent than any previous mode of political thinking, Marxism puts a premium on the systematic and rigorous examination of material reality and on guides to action derived from that examination.”
Following his attack on obsolete America and his praise for Marxism, Brzezinski, a member of the CFR before his death, went on to advocate the creation of “a council for global cooperation” bringing together “the United States, Japan, and Western Europe.” This body, he wrote, would “be concerned with political strategy” and “bringing together the political leaders of states sharing certain common aspirations and problems of modernity.” But in the end of the book, Brzezinski revealed the real purpose of his proposed council: another critical step on the road to a global government that brings together the communist and non-communist nations into one unified regime.
“To sum up: Though the objective of shaping a community of the developed nations is less ambitious than the goal of world government, it is more attainable,” he wrote. “It is more ambitious than the concept of an Atlantic community but historically more relevant to the new spatial revolution. Though cognizant of present divisions between communist and non-communist nations, it attempts to create a new framework for international affairs not by exploiting these divisions but rather by striving to preserve and create openings for eventual reconciliation. Finally, it recognizes that the world’s developed nations have a certain affinity, and that only by nurturing a greater sense of communality among them can an effective response to the increasing threat of global fragmentation — which itself intensifies the growing world-wide impatience with human inequality — be mounted.” Rockefeller apparently agreed, spawning the Trilateral Commission.
Much less has been written about the Trilateral Commission than, say, the CFR, but its influence is nevertheless enormous. And even well-respected conservatives have long recognized the threat this outfit poses to liberty and America. In his 1979 memoir With No Apologies, Senator Barry Goldwater exposed its agenda. “In my view the Trilateral Commission represents a skillful, coordinated effort to seize control and consolidate the four centers of power — political, monetary, intellectual, and ecclesiastical,” he wrote. “What the Trilaterals truly intend is the creation of a worldwide economic power superior to the political governments of the nation-states involved…. As managers and creators of the system they will rule the future.”
Around that time, a major exposé of the Trilateral Commission was written by Stanford historian Antony Sutton and researcher Patrick Wood, entitled Trilaterals Over Washington. In a recent statement to The New American, Wood highlighted the significance of the organization. “The Trilateral Commission was international, founded to create a ‘New International Economic Order,’” explained Wood, editor of Technocracy.news and a nationally known speaker. “Their members have been the architects and drivers of all modern globalization, including that which comes through the United Nations as Sustainable Development and Green Economy. Although the Trilateral Commission is international in scope, in the U.S. they are more than just being part of the so-called Deep State, they ARE the Deep State!”
Aside from the pursuit of globalism by bringing together key influential figures from Europe, Japan, and North America, a crucial element of the Trilateral Commission was and remains the “New International Economic Order” (NIEO) described by Wood. At first, the idea confused observers. Eventually, though, Wood concluded that the NIEO — an idea regularly promoted by the UN, even using the same term — was a re-branding of the older movement for “technocracy.” In fact, Brzezinski’s 1970s book, which purports to deal with “America’s Role in the Technetronic Era,” makes that clear. In essence, a global technocracy would involve rule not by elected representatives, but by technocrats. Freedom would be a thing of the past. And it appears to be coming into view.
Far from concealing his agenda, Brzezinski continually boasted about it when surrounded by his comrades. For instance, in 1995, speaking at the “State of the World Forum” convened by former Soviet dictator Mikhail Gorbachev and backed by the Rockefellers and other establishment forces in the West, the luminary behind the Trilateral Commission proudly touted the vision for a one-world regime. “We do not have a New World Order…. We cannot leap into world government in one quick step,” he explained. “In brief, the precondition for eventual globalization — genuine globalization — is progressive regionalization, because thereby we move toward larger, more stable, more cooperative units.” And indeed, the crucial Deep State organization has played a key role in accelerating that process in Europe via the European Union, in North America using NAFTA, and in the Pacific region using a wide array of transnational regimes.