The United Nations Exposed

Chapter 4
"Capitalists" and the Communist Dimension

[T]he American Communists worked energetically and tirelessly to lay the foundations for the United Nations which we were sure would come into existence.1
— Earl Browder, General Secretary of the Communist Party USA

This task is the task of the world proletarian revolution, the task of the creation of the world Soviet republic.2
— V.I. Lenin, 1920 Congress of the Communist International

[A] World Union of Soviet Socialist Republics uniting the whole of mankind under the hegemony of the international proletariat organized as a state.3
— "Program of the Communist International," 1928

The ultimate object of the parties of the Socialist International is nothing less than world government. As a first step towards it, they seek to strengthen the United Nations....4
— Declaration of the Socialist International 1962 Conference, Oslo, Norway

[T]he conflict between the two great superpowers ... will be replaced by the USDR (a union of socialist democratic republics). This will be a penultimate stage of progress toward a truly global world federal union...."5
— Professor Mortimer Adler, socialist, author, 1991

We saw in the last chapter that, like the Communists (see above quotes) the American one-world Insiders, operating primarily through their CFR front, "worked energetically and tirelessly to lay the foundations for the United Nations."6 We saw also that from start to finish the UN has been wholly a CFR-conceived and driven operation.

This is a fact that the historical record overwhelmingly and indisputably proves.*

* Robert W. Lee writes in his 1981 expose, The United Nations Conspiracy, "When the San Francisco Conference convened on April 25 of that year [1945] to finalize and approve the UN Charter, more than forty members of the United States delegation had been, were, or would later become members of the CFR."8 Mr. Lee lists the CFR founding fathers of the UN in Appendix C to his book. (Or see: www.getusout.org.)

The historical record also proves with super-abundant documentation that these globalist architects intended that the United Nations and its related international institutions would be gradually enlarged and strengthened until, ultimately, it would subsume all nations under an all-powerful, one-world government.7

It is also beyond dispute that the leaders of the world Communist conspiracy were solidly behind the formation of the UN and have supported every effort to enlarge, strengthen, and empower it over the past half century. This is plainly evident from the official speeches, writings, and actions of top Soviet leaders and Communist leaders worldwide, as well as from official documents of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU). We have also very extensive testimony to this effect from numerous top Soviet defectors and former American Communist officials.

That the Communists would support an institution for world government is no mystery; the essence and substance of the whole Communist program has been the pursuit of that very object. As long ago as 1915, before the Bolshevik Revolution, Vladimir Lenin himself proposed a "United States of the World."9

Soviet dictator and mass murderer Joseph Stalin, as far back as 1922, stated:

"Let us hope that by forming our confederate republic we shall be creating a reliable bulwark against international capitalism and that the new confederate state will another step towards the amalgamation of the toilers of the hole world into a single World Socialist Soviet Republic."10*

Earl Browder, general secretary of the CPUSA, stated in his book Victory and After that,

"the American Communists worked energetically and tirelessly to lay the foundations for the United Nations which we were sure would come into existence."11

Moreover, this leader of the American Reds declared:

It can be said, without exaggeration, that ever closer relations between our nation and the Soviet Union are an unconditional requirement for the United Nations as a world coalition....

The United Nations is the instrument for victory. Victory is required for the survival of our nation. The Soviet Union is an essential part of the United Nations. Mutual confidence between our country and the Soviet Union and joint work in the leadership of the United Nations are absolutely necessary.12

Clearly, Communist leaders have always advocated, supported, and promoted the goal of world government generally, and the United Nations particularly, in word and deed. Dr. Bella Dodd, a former top CPUSA official, told of her role in the Communist campaign for the UN:

"When the Yalta conference had ended, the Communists prepared to support the United Nations Charter which was to be adopted at the San Francisco conference to be held in May and June, 1945. For this I organized a corps of speakers and we took to the street corners and held open-air meetings in the millinery and clothing sections of New York where thousands of people congregate at the lunch hour. We spoke of the need for world unity and in support of the Yalta decisions."15

In his 1932 book Toward Soviet America, William Z. Foster, national chairman of the Communist Party USA (CPUSA), wrote:

"The American Soviet government will join with the other Soviet governments in a world Soviet Union.... A Communist world will be a unified, organized world. The economic system will be one great organization, based upon the principle of planning now dawning in the U.S.S.R. The American Soviet government will be an important section in this world organization."13

In 1936, the official program of the Communist International proclaimed:

"Dictatorship can be established only by a victory of socialism in different countries or groups of countries, after which the proletariat republics would unite on federal lines with those already in existence, and this system of federal unions would expand ... at length forming the World Union of Socialist Soviet Republics." 14

Shortly after the founding of the UN, in March of 1946, Stalin declared:

"I attribute great importance to U.N.O. [United Nations Organization, as it was then commonly called] since it is a serious instrument for preservation of peace and international security."16

On one level, Stalin's expressed desire for "peace" and "security" is an obviously disingenuous propaganda ploy devoid of any meaning, in the sense that most people ascribe to those words. However, in the Communist sense, where "peace" and "security" are defined as an absence of resistance to Communism, Stalin's endorsement of the UN is perfectly understandable. He knew that the UN's very nature and structure would contribute to Communist advantage, since his agents had helped design it. And he knew that the UN was permeated with Communist agents who would assure that it remained a Communist instrument.

For these same reasons, The Constitution of the Communist Party of the United States of America (1957 version) states that,

"the true national interest of our country and the cause of peace and progress require the solidarity of all freedom-loving peoples, peaceful coexistence of all nations, and the strengthening of the United Nations as a universal instrument of peace."17

Reds Among the Founders

Of course, the Communists were not only working outside the UN to stir up support for the new global organization, they were also running things on the inside — in concert with their like-minded, one-world CFR cohorts. Keep in mind that it was Soviet agent Alger Hiss (CFR), acting director of the State Department's Office of Special Political Affairs, who served as executive secretary of the critically important 1944 Dumbarton Oaks Conference, where the UN Charter was drafted.18

In that "noble" endeavor, Stalin's secret agent Hiss and Stalin's open agent V. M. Molotov were the two prime players. The Communists couldn't lose: "our guy" and "their guy" were both "Stalin's guys," two hands on the same hairy body.

But it was much worse than that; Hiss was far from the only Communist agent in (not under) the UN bed.

The July 1944 Bretton Woods Conference was as important for the about-to-beborn UN as was the Dumbarton Oaks Conference. Bretton Woods established the post-World War II global economic policies and architecture, including the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank group of institutions. Bretton Woods was planned and initiated by the Economic and Finance Group of the Council on Foreign Relations. The leader of the conference and the head of the

U.S. delegation was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury Harry Dexter White, a secret member of a Soviet espionage ring.19 Assisting White as technical secretary of the conference was another Soviet agent at the Treasury Department, Virginius Frank Coe.

In his important book on the UN, The Fearful Master, author G. Edward Griffin wrote:

In 1950 the State Department issued a document entitled Postwar Foreign Policy Preparation, 1939-45.... This and similar official records reveal that the following men were key government figures in UN planning within the U.S. State Department and Treasury Department: Alger Hiss, Harry Dexter White, Virginius Frank Coe, Dean Acheson, Noel Field, Lawrence Duggan, Henry Julian Wadleigh, John Carter Vincent, David Weintraub, Nathan Gregory Silvermaster, Harold Glasser, Victor Perlo, Irving Kaplan, Solomon Adler, Abraham George Silverman, William L. Ullman and William H. Taylor. With the single exception of Dean Acheson, all of these men have since been identified in sworn testimony as secret Communist agents!20 [Emphasis in original.]

UN Charter: A Marxist-Leninist Blueprint

With the pedigrees of these designers in mind, it should come as no surprise that the great UN Charter, so reverentially extolled by all internationalists, is a purely Marxist-Leninist blueprint. But you needn't take our word for it; that's the assessment of former top Communist Party member Joseph Z. Kornfeder.

In his sworn testimony before Congress in 1955, 10 years after the founding of the UN, Mr. Kornfeder stated:

I need not be a member of the United Nations Secretariat to know that the UN "blueprint" is a Communist one. I was at the Moscow headquarters of the world Communist party for nearly three years and was acquainted with most of the top leaders.... I went to their colleges; I learned their pattern of operations, and if I see that pattern in effect anywhere, I can recognize it....

From the point of view of its master designers meeting at Dumbarton Oaks and Bretton Woods, and which included such masterful agents as Alger Hiss, Harry Dexter White, Lauchlin Currie, and others, the UN was, and is, not a failure. They and the Kremlin masterminds behind them never intended the UN as a peace-keeping organization. What they had in mind was a fancy and colossal Trojan horse.... Its [the UN's] internal setup, Communist designed, is a pattern for sociological conquest; a pattern aimed to serve the purpose of Communist penetration of the West. It is ingenious and deceptive.21

Kornfeder's evaluation of the UN is backed up by no less an authority than former UN Secretary-General U Thant. Mr. Thant was a Marxist, winner of the Soviet Union's Lenin Peace Prize.

"Lenin was a man with a mind of great clarity and inci-siveness," Thant said, "and his ideas have had a profound influence on the course of contemporary history."

The Burmese Marxist continued:

"[Lenin's] ideals of peace and peaceful coexistence among states have won widespread international acceptance and they are in line with the aims of the U.N. Charter."22

There you have it, and from an unimpeachable source: The aims of the UN Charter are "in line" with the "ideals of peace" of Lenin, the Communist dictator and butcher. On this one point, at least, we can find no cause for disagreement with Mr. Thant.

Of course, it is of utmost importance that one keep in mind that "peace," in Marxist-Leninist terms, does not mean an absence of war, but an absence of resistance to Communism.

Serving Red Imperialism

The Kremlin's agents wasted no time in using the newly created UN machinery to advance global Communist imperialism. Innumerable examples have been documented of UN agencies providing concrete, material aid to Communist regimes and revolutionary efforts, and, conversely, opposing, thwarting, and destroying non-Communist and anti-Communist governments and movements.23

A condensed survey of the United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration (UNRRA), which was established by the CFR Insiders in our government even before the founding of the UN, provides a tragic look at what was to follow. Under the direction of Herbert H. Lehman (CFR), the UNRRA staff was turned into an international cabal of Communists from various countries who applied the billions of dollars of UNRRA's "humanitarian aid" (taken from U.S. taxpayers) to Communist revolutionary purposes.

The U.S. Ambassador to Poland, Arthur Bliss Lane, told what he had witnessed of UNRRA's pro-Communist actions at the end of World War II.

"Over my personal protest," said Ambassador Lane, "Lehman had appointed as director of the first UNRRA mission to Poland the Soviet member of the UNRRA council, Mr. Menshikov, whose first duty would be ... distribution of UNRRA supplies."

As a result, supplies could be obtained "only by those persons holding a specified type of ration card issued solely to government employees or to members of the Workers and Socialist parties."24 Which greatly assisted the Red takeover of Poland.

Likewise, Colonel Jan Bukar, in his testimony before Congress, described a similar experience in Czechoslovakia:

"In the distribution of the goods through UNRRA, the people who got any portion of the goods had to be enrolled as members of the Communist Party ... [and] I want again to state that through UNRRA the Communist Party gained many members."25

"With a total disregard of our national interests," wrote author and investigative reporter Eugene W. Castle, "UNRRA money was unreservedly given to the Communist-ruled nations behind the Iron Curtain. It fed discontented peoples and strengthened the Red grip on their governments."26

In China, millions of dollars in UNRRA funds and supplies were going to Communist Madame Sun Yat-sen and Mao Tse-tung for their ultimate triumph over General Chiang Kai-shek.27

This same pattern would appear again and again over the following decades through such UN institutions as UNICEF, UNESCO, WHO, UNHCR, FAO, UNFPA, IMF, the World Bank, etc.

Red Trojan Horse

Millions of lives could have been saved and untold misery, murder, terror, and destruction averted, if U.S. officials had been forced by an informed American public to heed the warnings of credible witnesses and an incredible trail of evidence.

The tragic history that has unfolded since the testimonies of Dr. Bella Dodd, Col. Bukar, Mr. Kornfeder, and others has more than vindicated their most frightening alarms. The UN has indeed proven to be a gigantic and deadly Trojan horse.

The following are but a few of the many advantages that the Communists expected to realize from the creation of the UN:

Economic assistance through the vast array of UN agencies.

Enormous potential for expansion of espionage, subversion, and terrorism through the diplomatic immunity offered UN officials.

Use of the UN podium for Communist propaganda purposes.

Use of UN diplomatic and propaganda machinery to attack and undermine anti-Communist countries and to support pro-Communist regimes and organizations.

Transfer of tremendous sums of money from the American producers to corrupt, collectivist projects and potentates throughout the world.

Steady erosion of U.S. sovereignty through a myriad of UN treaties and agreements.

Depletion and weakening of U.S. military resources in UN operations worldwide.

Gradual subordination of U.S. military command to international authority (UN, NATO, SEATO, CENTO, OAS, etc.).

Unfortunately, the UN has delivered for the Reds beyond their wildest dreams. In the field of espionage and subversion alone, it has been a huge bonanza.

During U.S. Senate hearings in 1952, Senator James O. Eastland stated:

I am appalled at the extensive evidence indicating that there is today in the United Nations among the American employees there the greatest concentration of Communists that this committee has ever encountered.... [A]lmost all of these people have in the past been employees of the United States Government in high and sensitive positions.28*

By the mid 1960s, frustrated Americans were angrily (and accurately) charging that the United Nations "was conceived by Communists, founded by Communists, has always been controlled by Communists, and has been used increasingly — and ever more brazenly — to carry out Communist purposes."

Over the ensuing years, numerous investigations and reports have exposed the subversion, terrorism, and espionage activities of many foreign nationals operating through the UN as well, especially those from Russia, China, Cuba, and the Soviet bloc states.

"Oh, but that is ancient history and no longer a concern, now that the Cold War is over," warble the UN's defenders.

Not true; the UN continued to be a nest of spies. On October 24, 1991, the Wall Street Journal's deputy features editor Amity Shlaes (CFR) commented on evidence indicating that the UN Secretariat headquartered in New York City was still under the domination of old-line Communists, noting that following the supposed collapse of the Soviet Union,

"Westerners who worked at the U.N. ... found themselves surrounded by what many have called a communist mafia."29

Who Is Really in Charge?

However, this characterization of the UN was not completely accurate. As we have demonstrated in bare outline, Communists played key, central roles at all levels in planning, promoting, establishing, and manning the UN, and they have used it to great effect for their evil objectives ever since. Nevertheless, it is far too simplistic to view the UN and its operations purely as a "Communist plot."

As our preceding chapters demonstrate, there was another force at work on this grandiose and malevolent project as well — represented by the "one-world-global-government ideologists" described by Admiral Ward. Many of these individuals obviously were not Communists; in fact they were arch-capitalists, titans of Wall Street, with names like Rockefeller, Morgan, Carnegie, Lamont, Warburg, and Schiff.

And yet, they did indeed work hand in hand with the masters of the Kremlin to establish a system that they intended would supplant our own constitutional system of government and grow into a global leviathan state. And their successors have continued this subversive cooperation with both overt Communist leaders (as in China) and "ex-Communist" leaders (as in Russia), who now claim to be "democratic reformers."

Professor Carroll Quigley, the Insider historian we met in the previous chapter, conceded that anti-Communists who had pointed to this strange and diabolic Communist-capitalist symbiosis were not hallucinating:

There does exist, and has existed for a generation, an international Anglophile network which operates, to some extent, in the way the radical Right believes the Communists act. In fact, this network, which we may identify as the Round Table Groups, has no aversion to cooperating with the Communists, or any other groups, and frequently does so.30

"It was this group of people," said Quigley, "whose wealth and influence ... provided much of the framework of influence which the Communist sympathizers and fellow travelers took over in the United States in the 1930s. It must be recognized that the power that these energetic Left-wingers exercised was never their own power or Communist power but was ultimately the power of the international financial coterie...."31 (Emphasis added.)

Regarding that secretive coterie, he described the "relationship between the financial circles of London and those of the eastern United States which reflects one of the most powerful influences in twentieth-century American and world history. The two ends of this English-speaking axis have sometimes been called, perhaps facetiously, the English and American Establishments.

There is, however, a considerable degree of truth behind the joke, a truth which reflects a very real power structure. It is this power structure which the Radical Right in the United States has been attacking for years in the belief that they are attacking the Communists."32

Congressional Investigations The treasonous workings of this elite were partially revealed, the professor noted, by congressional investigators in the 1950s who,

"following backward to their source the threads which led from admitted Communists like Whittaker Chambers, through Alger Hiss and the Carnegie Endowment to Thomas Lamont and the Morgan Bank, fell into the whole complicated network of the interlocking tax-exempt foundations." 33

"It soon became clear," Quigley observed, "that people of immense wealth would be unhappy if the investigation went too far and that the 'most respected' newspapers in the country, closely allied with these men of wealth, would not get excited enough about any revelations to make the publicity worth while...."34

Here the professor sins by gross understatement and distortion. These "people of immense wealth" and their "closely allied" media did indeed get "excited," so much so that they went to incredible lengths to sabotage and stop the inves-tigation, smear its principal players, and smother the facts it had uncovered.

Thus, it is not surprising that the Reece Committee, established by Congress in 1953 to investigate the tax-exempt foundations, fell far short of fully exposing the mounting peril. Nevertheless, the committee's report did sound a serious alarm, warning that the major foundations (Carnegie, Ford, Rockefeller) and interlocking organizations like the CFR "have exercised a strong effect upon our foreign policy and upon public education in things international."35

The committee stated:

"The net result of these combined efforts has been to promote 'internationalism' in a particular sense — a form directed toward 'world government' and derogation of American 'nationalism.'"36

The Reece Committee also charged that these foundations (which were invariably directed by CFR members),

"have actively supported attacks upon our social and government system and financed the promotion of socialism and collectivist ideas."37

It declared, moreover, that the CFR had become "in essence an agency of the United States Government" and that its,

"productions [books, periodicals, study guides, reports, etc.] are not objective but are directed overwhelmingly at promoting the glob-alist concept."38

A far more important revelation disclosed by the committee's chief investigator never made it into congressional testimony or the committee's published report.

Investigator Norman Dodd recounted that during his visit to the Ford Foundation, the institution's president, Rowan Gaither (CFR), unexpectedly admitted that he and his colleagues were operating under directives,

"to the effect that we should make every effort to so alter life in the United States as to make possible a comfortable merger with the Soviet Union."39

This of course fit perfectly with the pattern that Dodd and the committee members had observed in the subversive projects and organizations funded by the foundation, but the admission flabbergasted them nonetheless.

Common Ground: Power

At this point a great many readers undoubtedly are scratching their heads in bewilderment.

"I don't get it," they say. "Why would wealthy capitalists conspire with Communists and promote Communism? Don't they stand to lose the most if Communism were to triumph?"

If you are among the bewildered head scratchers, don't feel bad. The confusion is understandable; the idea of wealthy capitalists scheming with bloody Bolsheviks does challenge some long-accepted and basic assumptions and definitions most of us hold concerning socio-economic-political relationships and the way the world works.

We agree that all capitalists should oppose collectivism in all its forms (i.e., communism, socialism, fascism), but it is a fact that many do not. Many "capitalists," while paying lip service to "free enterprise" and "market economics," actually abhor the competition of the marketplace.

They would much rather use government force (laws and regulations) to beat their competition than try to produce better widgets more efficiently and constantly have to come up with improvements, innovations, and better management, marketing, and production.

They realize that communism, socialism, and fascism are never the "share the wealth" schemes they pretend to be; they are inevitably and invariably "control the wealth" schemes, in which an elite oligarchy employs political power (backed up by military and police force) to control all the wealth. They realize that step one in any "share the wealth" program is to "collect the wealth" (or "collectivization," as the Communists call it).

And they realize that once "step one" is completed no collectivist regime ever proceeds to "step two": share the wealth. The collectivized wealth remains in the hands of the ruling elite and their managerial class underlings (the privileged nomenklatura in the Soviet Union) while the toiling masses remain mired in grinding poverty, unable to escape by any amount of honest effort.

It is a well documented fact that some of the best-known "malefactors of great wealth" in this past century (and currently) have indeed conspired and collaborated with the most murderous dictators in history (Lenin, Stalin, Tito, Mao, Ceausescu, et al.) in the quest to establish their criminal scheme of totalitarian world government.40

The vast majority of these wealthy Insiders were not (and are not) themselves Communists — although some definitely were (and are). Armand Hammer (CFR), Frederick Vanderbilt Field (CFR), and Corliss Lamont, for instance, were all immensely rich Communists.

The non-Communist Insiders see the Communists (and their various Marxist brethren) as indispensable "partners" in the pursuit of "world order." The Communists are brutally blunt instruments, but adequately efficient, for destroying the old order and constructing the new. The Insiders, of course, periodically condemn their Communist partners and have frequently initiated massive military and intelligence operations ostensibly to oppose Communism. In fact, they repeatedly sold the United Nations and many of its programs to the American public as a means of opposing and/or taming the Communist threat.

However, the one-world Insiders were faced with a dilemma: how to modify the image of the brutal Communist menace to enable an eventual merger of the West with the U.S.S.R. without simultaneously undermining the impetus for collective global security and world government that the Communist threat provides.

"If the communist dynamic were greatly abated," wrote Professor Bloomfield in the previously mentioned study (see Chapter 2), "the West might well lose whatever incentive it has for world government.... [I]f there were no communist menace, would anyone be worrying about the need for such a revolution in international political arrangements?"41

According to Bloomfield,

"if the communists would agree, the West would favor a world effectively controlled by the United Nations."42 Thus the concealed objective of U.S. policy, as Bloomfield acknowledged, was not to defeat Communism, but rather "to transform and tame the forces of communism ... to the point where the present international system might be radically reshaped."43

Perhaps the reader has already perceived that since the rise of Mikhail Gorbachev and "perestroika," and the subsequent "collapse" of Communism, we have been traveling the CFR-laid course "to transform and tame communism."

And the world is indeed being "radically reshaped." A very important part of that reshaping process involves finding, or rather, manufacturing, credible menaces to substitute for Communism as "incentives for world government." In the following chapters, we will witness — again and again — the Insider-Communist conspiracy at work synthesizing these substitute menaces, and, in Bloomfield's words, "a series of sudden, nasty, and traumatic shocks"44 to bring about "the order" they desire.

We will also see the incredible global activist networks they have established and the elaborate processes they have set up to propagandize and organize on behalf of their criminal "new world order."

Back to Contents