Nexus Magazine Volume 11
- Number 2
generation of Rockefellers seems to be little more than guardians of
a legacy that continues to be endorsed through a network of
philanthropies and policy planning groups
John D. Rockefeller
III, Laurance, the Cousins and the Rockefeller Network Today
JOHN AND LAURANCE:
SAVING THE WORLD FROM ITSELF
Alongside Winthrop and Babs, John D. Rockefeller III and
are the forgotten children of John D. Rockefeller, Junior. On some
levels this should be no surprise, given the more prominent public
roles of Nelson and David, who clearly overshadowed their siblings
in terms of political power and influence; but from the point of
view of the New World Order, to ignore the respective contributions
of John and Laurance to the Rockefeller globalist ideology
commit a significant oversight. This error is, however, the
inevitable consequence of their much lower public profile, even the
invisibility of this duo. John D. Rockefeller III (hereafter
despite being the titular heir to the Rockefeller fortune and
carrying the name of Standard Oil's feared founder, was hardly a
prominent public figure during his lifetime, while Laurance has
always eschewed public exposure, rarely making public speeches or
The clues therefore, are fragmentary and can only be expanded into
their inevitable implications through deduction, but the evidence of
their complicity is there. It is most evident in their avowed
enthusiasm for environmentalism, though through the distorted prism
of needing to conduct population control amongst the mass of the
poor rather than the rich, and, in JDR3's case, of his moves to open
the economies of East Asia to American capital.
John D. Rockefeller III (1906–1978)
The eldest son of John D. Rockefeller, Jr, and his wife, Abby
Aldrich, JDR3 seemed to have inherited all of Junior's less
appealing personal traits, including a tiresomely guilty conscience
about being one of a number of inheritors of such a vast fortune and
with it an obsession with trying to atone for the sins of his
grandfather. A perception that Rockefeller gains were ill-gotten was
only reinforced by John D. Rockefeller Senior's deliberate refusal
to discuss the origins of Standard Oil with his children or
According to Ron Chernow, JDR3 "Like his father…aspired to be a
paragon of virtue and, also like his father, paid a terrible price
for it". JDR3 strove to meet Junior's lofty standards of personal
decorum and sacrifice, devoting himself to charitable works,
eschewing luxuries, and displaying seemingly endless
Yet, as is the case with all such personalities who indulge in such
self-flagellation and sacrifice, a belief that one has earned the
moral right to impose one's will upon others soon intrudes. This
soon afflicted JDR3, especially as he took his place in the
Rockefeller philanthropic network, chairing the Rockefeller
Foundation and the General Education Board and later founding the
Asia Society and the Population Council.
Alex Morris, the author of
the otherwise respectful tome Those Rockefeller Brothers (1953),
noted that in an 18-year period JDR3 had been a member of at least
36 boards and committees.
2 In fact, his involvement began at the end
of the 1920s. Besides the Rockefeller Foundation and General
Education Board, JDR3 had also been a board member of the
Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, the China Medical Board
and the Bureau of Social Hygiene.
Through his participation in this plethora of for-profit and
non-profit organizations, JDR3 soon replaced his guilt with a
determination to take further action, to make good on Senior's
original contention that the Rockefellers were in fact the
"stewards" of God's wealth. JDR3 also seemed to have accepted
Senior's accompanying stricture, piously followed by Junior, that it
was in fact up to the Rockefeller family to disperse that wealth in
a manner that changed people's thinking. JDR3 first displayed this
newfound sensibility in the early 1950s, after having served in the
US Navy during World War II and later as a cultural consultant to
John Foster Dulles, then heading the US negotiation on a treaty with
Japan. Out of that period of activity in service of government, JDR3
developed a deep and abiding interest in all things Asian. This more
expansive world outlook Junior's eldest son resolved to impress upon
Americans in general.
In the 1950s, determined to improve relations between Japan and
America, JDR3 revived the then moribund Japan Society. He also
sought to restore and upgrade governmental and non-governmental
relations between the US and most of Asia. This proved a more
difficult task than propping up the Japan Society with his patronage
and financial support, for the political environment had changed.
The Institute for Pacific Relations (IPR), to which the
Foundation had given support, was attacked for allegedly
facilitating the "loss" of China to the Communists. Leading the
charge against the IPR and foundations in general was the Special
House Committee to Investigate Tax-Exempt Foundations (the Reece
Committee). Although many of the Reece Committee's charges were
perhaps unjustified—especially given Senator Reece's refusal to
allow foundation leaders to formally challenge the accusations
against them—it had succeeded, if only temporarily, in restraining
the operations of the foundations. JDR3 sought to get around this by
recreating the IPR under a new guise by dispersing its
responsibilities to a range of new and existing organizations. The
IPR's academic functions, for instance, were transferred to the Far
Eastern Association, while its cultural role was assumed by JDR3's
own creation, the Asia Society, formally launched in 1956.
Although publicly only concerned with fostering cultural
relationships between the US and Asia, JDR3 had in mind another
function for the Asia Society in the longer term. As
Harr (a former
speechwriter to JDR3) and Johnson observe in their curiously titled
book, The Rockefeller Conscience (1991), although "comfortable" with
cultural affairs JDR3 was "well aware" of the need for and value of
a "comprehensive approach to foreign affairs" in the region.
But JDR3 was also conscious that in the mid-1950s "political factors
constrained the freedom of action of philanthropy". So, although
seemingly devoted to cultural projects, JDR3 in effect planned for
the role of the Asia Society to "grow into other activities in due
Sure enough, evolving from its original cultural beginnings, the
Asia Society has grown into an organization that now describes its
mission somewhat more tantalizingly as "fostering understanding of
Asia and communication between Americans and the peoples of Asia and
the Pacific". The Asia Society now considers issues of foreign,
economic and defense policy in the region as a matter of routine and
describes its "pan-Asian approach" as inherently sensible at a time
when "many Asia/Pacific nations are forging stronger economic and
political links with their neighbors, and many pressing issues, from
trade to security to the environment, cut across national
5 The implications of this "pan-Asian approach",
especially when seen in the context of Nelson's and David's own
advocacy of regional integration, are too obvious to warrant further
JDR3's other creation was the Population Council, which he founded
in 1952. It is a more controversial creation, one that belies the
essentially benevolent purposes that some of his more sympathetic
biographers have attributed to him. According to Steve Weissman,
JDR3 and other founders of the early "Eco-Establishment", which
comprised the Population Council and Laurance Rockefeller's
Conservation Foundation, are united by the view that natural
resources must be conserved or, to be more precise, protected from
being exploited by smaller businesses and individuals so as to
maintain an ongoing supply of resources for the exclusive benefit of
larger business entities in the long run.
population formed an inevitable part of this program of
conservation—something that JDR3 had embraced with obvious
enthusiasm since his days with the Rockefeller-funded Bureau of
Social Hygiene. This was in tune with the long-term interests of the
Rockefellers in this issue, something evident since 1936 when the
Rockefeller Foundation had provided funds to the
Population Research at Princeton University.
JDR3 was arguably motivated by such goals, although he was always
careful not to be too explicit, suggesting his objectives were those
of an idealist. As JDR3 explained in his lecture to the United
Nations Food and Agriculture Organization in the Second McDougall
Lecture in 1961, the "grand mission" of the Rockefeller Foundation,
like the FAO, was the "well-being of mankind".
JDR3 argued that
there was a "relationship between population growth and social
development" and that "responsible leaders" in each country needed
to "decide whether population stabilization was required". "To my
mind," he explained, "population growth is second only to control of
atomic weapons as the paramount problem of the day." There was a
"cold inevitability, a certainty that is mathematical, that gives
the problems posed by too-rapid population growth a somber and
chilling caste indeed". The language was indeed careful, but the
implications were soon apparent: the "grim fact" of population
growth, he warned, "cuts across all the basic needs of mankind
and…frustrates man's achievement of his higher needs".
In his book, The Second American Revolution (1973), JDR3 persisted
in likening overpopulation to nuclear war, arguing that it was the
"slow way" to "render [the] planet uninhabitable"; in fact, "no
problem is more fundamental in long-range terms". JDR3 noted with
some pride the findings of the Commission on Population Growth
the American Future, set up by Congress in 1970 with him as
that the "time has come for the United States to welcome
and plan for a stabilized population" and that "no substantial
benefit will result from further growth of the nation's population".
But for JDR3, getting population stabilization right in the US was
merely a dress rehearsal for applying such methods globally. By
being able to "cope with these broad problems on the home front",
JDR3 wrote, America would be "better equip[ped] to play a
constructive role internationally".10
JDR3's warning about the population explosion was mirrored by others
in the Rockefeller family and its organs. The Rockefeller Brothers
Fund report, "Prospect for America", raised the prospect of "extreme
nationalism" arising out of the "restlessness produced in a rapidly
growing population", something magnified by "the preponderance of
David Rockefeller also made his contribution, using
language perhaps more revealing than JDR3 chose, but hardly out of
tune with sentiments of the Rockefeller family, no matter how pious
its public image, that the population problem was one of economic
and political stability. "Unless we close the gap between population
and food supply," David observed in 1964, they risked "unleashing
upon this globe a frustration…an anguished fury more explosive than
the growth of population itself." It would also impact upon the
"economic well-being" of American businesses, should rampant
population growth fail to "create a climate of stability and order
which is necessary to attract private capital". And noting that
America was "rapidly depleting [its] domestic reserves of a vast
array of minerals needed by [its] industrial complex", David made
the odd suggestion that the "population barrier to development"
might prevent those goods reaching the US
12 —the unstated implication
being that if there are too many of them, then we cannot continue to
take what is surely ours by right…
The implementation of population control programs, with their
curious obsession with the developing countries, even though the
population density and resource consumption of those areas is
frequently far less than that of Western Europe or North America,
has given rise to charges of "genocide".
13 This is probably not
surprising as the transparent objective of population control
activists, at least those residing within the Establishment, is to
maintain a global racial balance that favors the rich countries as
well as ensures that developing countries' resources can still be
exploited with little competition from indigenous peoples.
Hand in hand with advocating population control, JDR3 was an
enthusiastic environmentalist—but in a manner that showed he had
shifted from being overly concerned with ensuring ongoing
profitability to preserving the material gains of his caste; or, to
put it another way, his concerns had shifted from owning the estate
to maintaining it. Having secured his own well-being, JDR3 was
determined to deny it to others, warning that "we must cut down on
unnecessary and extravagant consumption" or "the future of
'Spaceship Earth' will be in serious doubt". He followed this
prescription with calls for numerous types of environmental
legislation, regulation and enforcement as well as energy
conservation, and even suggested, in an obvious allusion to the
of Rome's apocalyptic studies, that the "ethic of perpetual economic
growth" should probably be discarded.14
This ideology of sacrificing such wants existed within an overall
framework in which JDR3 extolled the virtues of deeper involvement
of philanthropic organizations in the business of governing. One of
his pet concerns in The Second American Revolution was the
"imbalance" between government, business and philanthropy.
Government, he lamented, had become "very powerful"; business was
strong, but the non-profit sector was "weak". Despite the
government's strength, problems were "not getting solved"; in fact,
there was a "sheer overload" of government resources. As a solution,
JDR3 proposed an "essentially conservative", "long-term policy to
decentralize and privatize many government functions". Reading this
now, after the tumultuous economic reforms and privatization agenda
of the 1980s and 1990s, we can see from which corners this program
was supported. By "privatize", JDR3 indicated that he meant "moving
as many government functions and responsibilities toward the private
sector as possible", and he envisaged achieving this goal through
deregulation and the relaxation of anti-trust provisions. To
encourage "philanthropy as a social instrument" he pushed for
changes to the tax laws to make it easier to contribute to the
While an examination of the implementation of all these policy
prescriptions, though some were quite vague, is beyond the scope and
intent of this article, suffice it to say that with the endorsement
of JDR3 and his other siblings their evolution into a variety of
actual government policies has been assured. As for John D.
Rockefeller III, though, he remains a peripheral figure in most
World Order accounts despite most of his prescriptions playing an
integral role in the erosion of national sovereignty: by seeking to
reduce the power of governments while increasing that of private
groups; lending support to coordinated international efforts to
control population growth;
16 and endorsing a range of measures
designed to counter environmental damage, but with obvious
implications for international regulation.
Such obscurity was no doubt hastened by his death in a car accident
on Mt Pleasant on 10 July 1978, even though his demise was in the
midst of a particularly virulent dispute with Nelson over control of
the Rockefellers' philanthropic empire, particularly the RBF.
in future New World Order accounts, a more in-depth examination of
JDR3's agenda, particularly his views on population control and the
role of philanthropic organizations, is surely warranted.
Laurance S. Rockefeller (1910– )
Pursuing similar themes was the third-eldest of the Rockefeller
brothers, Laurance. In most New World Order accounts, when he is
actually mentioned it is usually assumed by default that Laurance
shares the Rockefeller family goal of achieving world government,
for the "Rockefellers are 100%
Illuminati" (Icke)—though this
agreement is by no means complete. Disputing this apparent consensus
is UFO researcher Michael Hesemann who, when queried by Israeli
investigative journalist Barry Chamish on his dealings with the
nonagenarian philanthropist, declared: "Laurance is the
of the family. I know all about the Rockefellers and their world
government plot but, I assure you, so does Laurance and he rejects
18 More mainstream admirers and critics tend to pigeon-hole
Laurance as a "venture capitalist" (Lundberg), while a more recent
account of his life has venerated the philanthropist as "Mr
Conservation" who has "done more than any other living American to
place outdoor issues…clearly on the public agenda" (Winks).
Part of the problem in discerning the most likely explanation is
Laurance's deliberately chosen obscurity. Taking a public role has
not been his preferred path; instead, he has operated through a
variety of organizations to achieve his desired goals, taking the
concept of delegation to an even higher degree than his siblings. As
Chernow has observed, Laurance possesses "his grandfather's
enigmatic detachment", showing little interest in attracting the
limelight. Laurance majored in philosophy at Princeton, the exposure
to "rational scrutiny" causing him to dispense with most of his
religious beliefs. After dropping out of Harvard Law School,
Laurance took up the Rockefeller seat on the
New York Stock Exchange
in 1934, where he soon displayed his business acumen, buying large
stakes in a number of aerospace enterprises including
McDonnell–Douglas, all of which benefited from wartime and later
Cold War boosts to national defense expenditures.
already a designated beneficiary of the Rockefeller trusts, but his
ventures only added to his wealth. The issue, though, is to what end
he intended to deploy it.
On 27 September 1991, when receiving the Congressional Gold Medal
for contributions to conservation and historical preservation from
then President George H. W. Bush, Laurance Rockefeller declared that
nothing was "more important" to him than the "creation of a
conservation ethic in America".
21 This might seem a somewhat
uncontroversial, even laudable, goal in some quarters and, in terms
of the New World Order, quite close to being irrelevant. In terms of
the Rockefeller goal of changing how people think,
proclaimed objective warrants a closer look, for such an aim is
consistent with the overall Rockefeller strategy of undermining
national sovereignty; quite simply, people's thinking must be
changed for a world state to work.
There are only a few tantalizing clues as to this direction in
Laurance's efforts, but they are worthy of mention. Writing in the
Reader's Digest in 1976, for example, Laurance Rockefeller put
forward his case for a "simpler life-style". What he appeared to
have in mind, however, was the conformity of the American people to
a new set of ideals, a new "ecological ethic":
"The last dozen years have been as traumatic and divisive as any in
our history. Assassinations, a tragic war, a political and economic
upheaval have divided and dismayed this country. In order to face
problems like these, a democracy needs themes and common goals which
bring unity and commitment. The emerging ecological ethic and the
change in life-style which accompany it may be such a force."
Laurance went on to observe that a "new pattern of living"
had emerged in the 1970s that included a wide range of recreational
fads such as fitness as well as the growing commitment to
environmentalist practices such as energy efficiency and recycling.
This "new pattern", he observed, was proving to be "essential to the
well-being of individuals and of the nation". That all Americans
adopt this new ethic voluntarily was essential, he opined, otherwise
"authoritarian" controls might be necessary to stave off
environmental and social degradation.
Laurance has pursued this objective further through his own
philanthropic efforts. Although a previous Chairman of the
Rockefeller Brothers Fund and at times involved in a variety of
other organizations including the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR),
Laurance has preferred to set his own philanthropic course. This has
ranged from his founding of the American Conservation Association
(formerly the Conservation Foundation) in 1958, through to his
ongoing financial support for such groups as the Center for
Psychology and Social Change (CPSC), the
California Institute for
Integral Studies (CIIS), the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC)
and the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). Some of
these are clearly activist environmentalist organizations; the
others have more esoteric concerns.
Laurance's projects seem overly ambitious—more like the experiments
of the indulgent rich than anything enduring, though it pays to be
cautious. In 2001, for example, Laurance gave the CIIS,
for which he is an Honorary Trustee, a grant of US$190,000 for the
Institute's "New Story of the Universe" project. According to the
CIIS website, project co-ordinator Professor Brian Swimme
"sees the amazing the story of the unfolding universe as one that
has the potential to unite people of all traditions and faiths".
Swimme himself was quick to thank his benefactor and make the
bold claim that his effort to create a "new story of the evolving
universe" by combining existing religious and scientific accounts of
creation would "serve as a link in creating an organizing mythic
framework for the new millennium".24
Laurance has also raised more than a few eyebrows with his
much-publicized funding of UFO research during the 1990s, some of
which persists to this day. The range of UFO organizations and
projects he has funded, and alleged contacts with the US Government
on the issue, is worth reviewing:
• In March 1993 Laurance,
assisted by a former naval intelligence officer, reportedly met with
Bill Clinton's science adviser to discuss UFOs and present a study
entitled "Matrix of UFO Belief".
• It is alleged that, in August 1995, Laurance discussed the
issue at length with President Clinton
at his ranch in Wyoming.
• From 1993 to 1995, Laurance provided US$500,000 to the
organization run by Dr John Mack, the Harvard psychologist who
attracted enormous controversy with his endorsement of the alien
• Laurance paid for at least two meetings with the
an organization comprising former intelligence officers and military
personnel who shared an interest in UFOs.
• Laurance once funded a plan to establish contact with
by radio telescope but by signaling them with banks of powerful
• Laurance also once held a UFO conference at his ranch in Wyoming.
• In 1995, Laurance provided US$30,000 to a project by the
Foundation, created by Marie "Bootsie" Galbraith, wife of investment
banker Evan Galbraith and one-time US ambassador to France, to
prepare a report on the most reliable evidence about UFOs. The
"Unidentified Flying Objects Briefing Document:
Best Available Evidence"
and prepared with the assistance of
(Center for UFO Studies), FUFOR (Fund for UFO Research) and
(Mutual UFO Network), went to designated "leaders of the world"
• In 1999, Laurance provided a grant in the "five-figure range" to
BLT Research Team, Inc. to study
crop circles. In 2002,
announced its findings that many crop circles were created not by
humans but by a "mysterious energy force".
Read below report:
The purpose of
Laurance Rockefeller's dabbling in the UFO field
has long posed a puzzle to
New World Order
researchers. One popular suggestion, drawing on an idea probably
pioneered by the late
William Cooper in his book, Behold A Pale
Horse (1991), is that Laurance's activities serve a more sinister
agenda to "present an 'alien invasion'…as a pretext to fully
entrench the New World Order" (Watson). The alien presence, though,
is to be deliberately and elaborately faked. As evidence of this
intent, the public musings of President Ronald Reagan in 1987 and
1988, on how an "alien threat" or being "threatened by…a power from
another planet" would cause all of humanity to set aside its
differences and "come together" as "citizens of the world", are
often cited. Coupled with Laurance's efforts to confirm the
existence of an alien presence and those of Hollywood to shape
public attitudes towards extraterrestrials, the stage is supposedly
being set to deceive the public.
The appeal of this theory is obvious; however, compelling proof in
its favor is lacking, forcing its advocates to rely on more
circumstantial evidence, witnesses with unverifiable claims, and a
willingness to speculate. If this theory is true, then its advocates
may rest assured they will be fêted for their prescience should the
In the view of this author, however, it seems more likely that
Laurance's dabbling in the UFO scene, besides reflecting some
possible eccentricities on his part, forms part of his broader
agenda to try to mould humanity's ethical outlook. Rather than
trying to establish the existence of a negative "alien threat", the
aim is gradually to reinforce the sense that there is a genuine,
possibly benevolent, alien presence out there—a presence that by its
very existence challenges existing religious, cultural and political
frameworks, surely compelling us to coalesce around a single new
idea. Perhaps along the lines of Swimme's "New Story of the
THE NEXT GENERATION
The five sons and one daughter of Junior gave forth another
generation of some 23 children, sometimes known as "the cousins".
Their contribution to the globalist ideology launched by Junior in
the 1920s and further transformed by their parents is barely
recognized yet no less significant, not least because of the major
generational rupture revealed at length in Peter Collier and
David Horowtiz's book, The Rockefellers (1976). Caught
up in the political tumult of the late 1960s and early 1970s, most
of the children of the Rockefeller brothers, especially those
belonging to David, rejected their family's legacy (and even the
name), embracing leftist causes including opposition to the Vietnam
War and a version of environmentalism less tied to the plutocratic
version of perfection promulgated by JDR3 and Laurance.
Since that time, though, as the cousins have become older their
radicalism has been tempered and diluted, and a few of them have
taken their place in the Rockefeller philanthropic network,
embracing Senior's original notions of "stewardship" and Junior's
enthusiasm for a world state.
The second eldest of David Rockefeller's three daughters, Peggy Dulany went through a period of rebellion in the 1970s based on her
outrage at the level of poverty in Latin America that she was
convinced her father had contributed to in some way. After a period
in Brazil working on poverty alleviation, she was involved in
similar programs in Boston and New York. Since the 1980s, however, a
mellowing of Dulany's opinions has been more than apparent, as she
has joined many of the organizations in which her father has played
such a key role, including the CFR, the Overseas Development Council
and the Rockefeller Foundation.
In 1986, Dulany used some of her share of the Rockefeller fortune to
found the Synergos Institute, an organization devoted to enhancing
the ability of philanthropic organizations to collaborate with
grassroots organizations to "reduce poverty and increase equity in
Africa, Asia and Latin America".
28 Although this agenda is surely
laudable, there are at least two reasons for caution. Firstly, there
is David Rockefeller's key role in the Global Philanthropists
Circle, a Synergos subsidiary—surely a case of the fox guarding the
hen house, given David's own admitted role in conceiving the
so-called "Washington Consensus", which is behind much of the
poverty in Latin America. And secondly, Synergos's focus on
enhancing the role and reach of philanthropy throughout those
regions seems more a case of enhancing the role of non-state actors
into a global enterprise—an explicit objective of both David and
In other avenues, Peggy Dulany has proved that her straying
from the path of Rockefeller internationalism was
indeed a momentary lapse. In early 1997, Dulany participated
in a "Global Governance for Sustainable Development" conference held
by the Rio+5 Forum, giving a presentation on "The Role of Global
Financial Institutions and Networks in Financing Sustainable
29 Also in 1997, she co-chaired a CFR-sponsored
Independent Task Force on Promoting US Economic Relations with
Africa. Among the recommendations of the task force were:
endorsement of an "Africa Growth and Opportunity Act" to increase US
private investment in Africa and create the groundwork for free
trade agreements in the region; and for the US to pay its
outstanding commitments to "the International Development
Association, the African Development Bank and Fund, and the United
Nations in order to carry a fair share of international cooperation
in support of African development".
In June 2003, Dulany joined the UN Secretary-General's Panel
on Civil Society and UN Relationships. The aim of the panel, claims
the UN, is to "review past and current practices and recommend
improvements for the future in order to make the interaction between
civil society and the United Nations more meaningful". The Panel's
definition of "Civil Society", according to a "contextual paper"
prepared by the Panel's Chairman, former Brazilian President
Fernando Henrique Cardoso, "encompasses a wide variety of
non-state actors, including parliamentarians and the private sector"
and "non-government organizations". With relations between the
and Civil Society beginning to "show signs of strain", there was a
need for "greater consistency and coherence" to be "introduced in
the rules of engagement with civil society".
explicitly linked this goal to the UN's "key role" in "strengthening
global governance" and "building a cosmopolitan law". Some
states were wary of increased NGO participation in such avenues,
Cardoso noted, but the proper response was to undermine those
objections to "reduce distrust, demonstrate the effectiveness of
collaboration and build consensus…"
31 The aim of the Panel is not to
exclude NGOs from decision-making processes, but to formalize and
entrench their presence within the UN system, giving them an
enduring role in building effective structures of global governance.
Peggy Dulany's participation on the Panel is unlikely to
result in any deviation from this goal.
David Rockefeller, Jr
The eldest of David Rockefeller's children, David Junior has
also succeeded his father by taking up senior positions in a variety
of foundations and policy-planning organizations. He is a trustee
and former Chairman of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund and the
Cultural Council, an honorary trustee of the Brookings Institution,
a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, and a former President
of the Rockefeller Family Fund. He has also been involved in a
number of environmental organizations, including as a member of the
Pew Oceans Commission, a trustee of the National Park Foundation and
founder of the Alaska Fund for the Future. David Junior's main
business role has been as Director and former Chairman of
Rockefeller & Co., Inc.
David Junior's take on the world is little known, save for only a
few snippets. In a speech on the relationship between business and
the arts in 1997, for example, he observed that: "The Internet has
fulfilled the prophecy of a global village. I do not believe that
big corporations can finesse their responsibility to define and
support the particular communities in which they operate most
actively." The answer to this dilemma, he opined, was "the arts
because they simultaneously embrace the particular and the
universal, [and] can best help us to grasp this world full of
tension and technology".
"The only long-answer to the problem of terrorism is to build a
global culture of peace", wrote Professor Steven C. Rockefeller, one
of Nelson's sons, on 29 September 2001.
Steven's prescriptions were perhaps unsurprising, given his role in
formulating the Earth Charter, a document released in March 2000 by
the Earth Charter Commission. The purpose of the Charter, according
to Steven, who was Chairman of the Earth Charter International
Drafting Committee, is to "articulate the ethical principles that
should shape whatever institutions of global governance the human
community decides to develop".
34 Providing overall guidance to those
forces, particularly NGOs, which are taking part in the steady
erosion of national sovereignty and the undermining of those
democratic systems that exist through the construction of more
effective international institutions, seems to be a primary
objective. Pointing to the "growth of a new powerful international
civil network that includes many influential nongovernmental
organizations", Steven Rockefeller has argued:
The emerging global civil society is in a position to exercise
significant influence on governments and international corporations
in the twenty-first century, and it can benefit from the kind of
strong integrated ethical vision that is being developed in the
The Earth Charter Initiative is no enterprise set up by an otherwise
obscure academic, but a joint effort involving Maurice Strong, the
Chairman of the Earth Council, and former Soviet President
Gorbachev, President of Green Cross International. Funding for the
Earth Charter Initiative has come from the RBF (of which
Chairman), some UN agencies, and the Netherlands government. More
importantly, the Charter's authors hope for it to receive
endorsement from the UN General Assembly, making it into a "soft law
document"—much like the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights,
which is a statement of intentions rather than a binding document.
However, as Steven notes, "in the history of international law, soft
law tends to become hard law over time". With this in mind, a "hard
law treaty", the Draft International Covenant on Environment and
Development, has been written in tandem with the Charter.
The document in question is closer to the visions of a purer world
promoted by JDR3 and Laurance—the musings of contented plutocrats
intent on leaving a legacy of global change rather than necessarily
increasing their personal wealth. According to Steven Rockefeller,
besides calling for a "culture of peace" the Charter envisages a
"just and sustainable socio-economic order", eradicating poverty,
promoting "ecological integrity", "human development in the fullest
sense", but in a manner that is "consistent with the flourishing of
Earth's ecological systems".
The "New Beginning" that the Charter promotes at its conclusion is
for all humanity to undergo a "change of heart and mind"—a message
also underlined in the Preamble, with its call for the unanimous
embrace of a "shared ethical vision" of "universal responsibility"
by securing a pledge of commitment to the Charter's principles from
those who endorse it.
The ultimate objective of this Utopian document is an Arcadia, a
perfect world made possible when we all think alike.
THE ROCKEFELLER NETWORK TODAY
While the commitment of the current generation of Rockefellers to
the Wilson–Fosdick New World Order model may seem limited, the
Rockefeller fortune, directed through a plethora of foundations and
organizations, ensures that the ideology has supporters even if they
are not family. Leading this effort are the Rockefeller Brothers
Fund, the Rockefeller Foundation and the less-well-known
Family Fund and Laurance Rockefeller Charitable Trust. Each of these
organizations promotes the globalist agenda, some more obviously
On its website, the
Rockefeller Brothers Fund describes itself as a
"philanthropic organization dedicated to improving the well-being of
all people in the transition to global interdependence". This is
evident in the plethora of programs to which the RBF devotes
resources from its still-deep coffers. In 1997, for example, the
then outgoing RBF Chairman, Abby M. O'Neill, noted how the
long been committed to a number of "core program ideas", among them
"the challenge of global interdependence and American leadership".
These programs were occasionally adjusted, and in 1983 the RBF
adopted a "One World" strategy with an "explicitly global
perspective and an emphasis on the convergence of national and
international frameworks". Some 15 years later, O'Neill observed,
"the One World theme is more relevant than ever".
During the 1980s, the RBF's "One World" programs focused on nuclear
non-proliferation and international relations, development, trade
and finance. In 1996, following the end of the Cold War, the RBF
revised its "One World" strategy, launching what was intended to be
a two-year review of its grant-making. To help develop new
guidelines, a "Project on World Security" was started. The
funded a program of research on "transnational governance" at the
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. The RBF's new guidelines
for its "Global Security Program", released in 1999, committed the
Fund to building "strong domestic constituencies for cooperative
international engagement" and supporting efforts to "understand,
adjust to and steer the process of increased economic
A look at the Global Security Program's grants for 1999 and 2000
reveals the RBF gave grants to: the International Forum on
Globalization "For efforts to develop a positive vision of global
governance"; US$70,000 to the Benton Foundation to
oneworld.org website to the US;
$500,000 to the Aspen Institute for its role in the "Global
Interdependence Initiative" project; $300,000 to the CEIP for its
"Managing Global Issues Project"; and $200,000 to the
in Switzerland to support developing-country NGOs and governments on
"trade and global governance issues".
One of the first reports of the RBF's Global Interdependence
Initiative, "Global Interdependence and the Need for Social
Stewardship" (1997), noted with alarm the "waning of public and
political support" within the US for "cooperative international
engagement". To remedy this, the report recommended that US leaders
work to convince the American public that such an approach was
consistent with their values and interests. And to support the
leadership, a wide-ranging "public" constituency should be built,
combining NGOs, businesses, educators, unions, the media, religious
groups and philanthropic foundations. NGOs would be "central to any
constituency-building effort" and could also be used by multilateral
and bilateral institutions to "bypass corrupt governments".
with all Rockefeller efforts, changing public attitudes is the key.
The implications of this report and others in this project are
simple: public attitudes, especially in the US, must be changed to
make "One World" possible.
Written into the Charter of the
Rockefeller Foundation, when it was
originally founded in 1913, is the objective of contributing to "the
well-being of mankind throughout the world". During much of its
life, the Foundation has realized this goal through its involvement
in mostly medical and educational programs around the world and, for
a time during the 1920s, the provision of direct financial support
to certain operations of the League of Nations. In 1999, however,
the Rockefeller Foundation announced a "new global mission" of
helping "poor people excluded from globalization's benefits".
The aims or "themes" seemed laudable: to "improve poor people's
lives and livelihoods through the application of knowledge, science,
technology, research and analysis"; and to "ensure that
globalization processes are more democratic and equitable and
benefit the most vulnerable, disenfranchised populations, cultures
and communities around the world".
Though we might note that as this last "theme", actually designated
a "cross-theme", is "global inclusion", the ultimate objective is
easy to discern: to draw those outside of the evolving "One World"
into its grasp. Beyond including "poor people" in "decisions that
may affect their lives" is the implicit acknowledgement that if
their lives are already not being affected by globalization then
they soon will be.
The other funds also contribute, though perhaps less notably. The
little-known Rockefeller Family Fund, for instance,
acts as a conduit for donations from other philanthropic
organizations, including the Rockefeller, Ford, Turner, Scherman
Packard Foundations, to environmental causes such as preventing
global warming and promoting a "Green Car". The
RFF also provides
money to the Funders Network on Trade and Globalization, the
organization used by many foundations to fund NGOs.
43 The even more
obscure Laurance Rockefeller Charitable Trust funds
activist groups, such as the
Center for Science in the Public
Interest, an organization that has targeted the fast food
industry for legal action in its determination to force people to
eat healthy foods.
44 The purpose of this funding is always the same:
to increase the pressures on governments and to mould public opinion
in service of the broader Utopian goal of "One World".
The purpose of this series has been to document the evolution of the
Rockefeller family's internationalist ideology from the 1920s
through to the present day. Underlying this analysis is an
assumption, gleaned from the various primary documents cited, that
the Rockefeller strategy for a New World Order
or "One World" has two essential mutually reinforcing
firstly, the promotion of international economic
secondly, the establishment of strong supranational
The origins of this agenda can be traced to the ideas of US
President Woodrow Wilson, which were then passed on to John D.
Rockefeller, Junior, by his adviser, Raymond B.
Fosdick. Junior's sons, especially David and Nelson, have done
the most to promote, expand and implement this agenda. The current
generation of Rockefellers, in contrast, seems little more than
guardians of a legacy—one that the network of Rockefeller
philanthropies and policy-planning groups continues to endorse.
The waning of direct Rockefeller influence does not, unfortunately,
mean the decline of the program by any means, for there are plenty
of new rich who share the same objectives and who are determined to
use their wealth to the same ends.
The notorious currency speculator George Soros, for example,
has long portrayed himself as a supporter of a "global open
society". Mirroring David Rockefeller's trilateralist
concept, Soros has called for an alliance of the "democratic
states of the world", led by the United States working with the
European Union, to build a "global open society" by reforming the
and other supranational institutions including the World Trade
5 45 He has devoted the resources of his main
philanthropic organization, the Open Society Institute,
to this goal.
Ted Turner, the founder of CNN, is another in
this league, who demonstrated his intentions through his US$1
billion donation to the United Nations in 1997. "I see myself as a
citizen of this Earth," Turner once told Gorbachev.
Though Turner's fortunes have waned, other plutocrats—among
them Bill Gates and Warren Buffett, both intent on
dispersing most of their fortunes—are waiting in the wings.
The agenda of the Rockefellers and their successors is
hidden in plain sight. If we look past the veil of media-led denial
and ridicule, one does not have to look far to find it. Whether we
just watch it unfold is another matter…
Back to Part 5
Chernow, Titan: The Life of John D. Rockefeller, Sr, Warner Books,
1999, pp. 653-656.
2. Ferdinand Lundberg, The Rich and The Super-Rich:
A Study in the Power of Money Today, Lyle Stuart, Inc, 1968, p. 597.
3. John E. Harr and Peter J. Johnson, The
Rockefeller Conscience: An American Family in Public and in Private,
Charles Scribner's Sons, 1991, pp. 90-96.
4. ibid., p. 98.
5. See Asia Society website at
6. See Katherine Barkley and Steve Weissman, "The
Eco-Establishment"; and Steve Weissman, "Why the Population Bomb Is
A Rockefeller Baby", in Editors of Ramparts, Eco-Catastrophe, Harper
& Row, 1970.
7. Weissman, "Why the Population Bomb Is a
Rockefeller Baby", p. 29; and Raymond B. Fosdick, The Story of the
Rockefeller Foundation, Odhams Press, 1952, p. 244.
8. John D. Rockefeller III, "People, Food and the
Well-Being of Mankind", Second McDougall Lecture 1961, Food and
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 1961, pp. 9, 16-18.
9. This was a report that then President Richard
Nixon dismissed in a brief but stiff meeting with JDR3, adding to
the long list of deliberate snubs Nixon directed at the
Rockefellers, possibly to his ultimate cost. For details of this
incident, see Peter Collier and David Horowitz, The Rockefellers: An
American Dynasty, New American Library, 1976, pp. 374-375.
10. John D. Rockefeller III, The Second American
Revolution: Some Personal Observations, Harper & Row, 1973, pp.
11. Quoted in Weissman, "Why The Population Bomb
Is A Rockefeller Baby", pp. 30-31.
12. David Rockefeller, "The Population Problem and
Economic Progress", Vital Speeches of the Day, April 1, 1966, p.
13. See, for example, "Genocide" at
http://www.africa2000.com ; and
Mark and Louise Zwick, "Population Control: Ethnic Cleansing: Return
of Nazi Eugenics", Houston Catholic Worker, July-August 1999.
14. Rockefeller, The Second American Revolution,
15. ibid., pp. 106-110, 117, 119-120, 125-130.
16. For a more detailed account, see Weissman,
"Why The Population Bomb Is A Rockefeller Baby".
17. For one of few accounts of this dispute,
though one that is severely limited by being from David
Rockefeller's point of view alone, see David Rockefeller, Memoirs,
Random House, 2002, pp. 336-355. Nelson died six months later, when,
according to David, most of the dispute had been resolved.
18. David Icke, "Crop Circle Mystery Solved. Phew!
What Would We Do Without The Rockefellers? Thanks, Colin", at
; and Michael Hesemann, quoted in Barry Chamish, 'My Disappearance
Explained', Insight, July 8, 2001 (emphasis added).
19. Lundberg, The Rich and the Super-Rich, p. 596;
and Robin W. Winks, "Laurance S. Rockefeller: Catalyst for
Conservation – Chapter One", New York Times, November 23, 1997.
20. Chernow, Titan, pp. 658-659.
Quoted in Winks, "Laurance S. Rockefeller".
22. Laurance Rockefeller, "The Case for a Simpler
Life-Style", The Reader's Digest, February 1976, p. 61 (emphasis
23. ibid., pp. 64-65.
24. "Laurance S. Rockefeller Grants $190,000 for
Faculty Projects Support for 'New Story of the Universe' Projects",
Inner Eye, February 8, 2001, at CIIS website,
http://www.ciis.edu (emphasis added).
25. The following list is derived from:
"Rockefeller Greets Aliens! A Rich Guy's UFO Dream", New York
Observer, April 8, 1996; Peter Carlson, "Fertile Imaginations", New
York Times, August 10, 2002; and Paul Joseph Watson, "Counterfeit
Foe – The Ultimate Hegelian Dialectic", at
26. See Watson, "Counterfeit Foe"; and Milton
William Cooper, Behold A Pale Horse, Light Technology, 1991, pp.
27. See Susan Adams, "The Reluctant Rockefeller",
Forbes, May 3, 1999, p. 86.
28. See the Synergos Institute website at
Rio+5 Forum, "Global Governance for
Sustainable Development", March 18, 1997 at
30. Statement of CFR Task Force, Promoting US
Economic Relations with Africa, May 22, 1997, at CFR website,
31. Fernando Henrique Cardoso, Civil Society and
Global Governance, High-Level Panel on UN-Civil Society, June 13,
2003, at UN website
32. David Rockefeller, Jr, "Reflections and
Visions: Business–Arts Alliances", October 14, 1997, at
33. Steven C. Rockefeller, "Building a Global
Culture of Peace: The Earth Charter", Orion Online, September 29,
34. Steven C. Rockefeller, "Rockefeller Speaks Up
for the Earth Charter", The New American, November 4, 2002.
35. Steven C. Rockefeller, "An Introduction to the
Text of the Earth Charter", at
38. Abby M. O'Neill, Chairman's Essay, from the
1997 RBF Annual Report, at
39. "Global Security Program: Introduction to the
RBF's New Global Security Guidelines", at
40. "One World: Global Security, Grants", at
41. Laurie Ann Mazur and Susan E. Sechler, Global
Interdependence and the Need for Social Stewardship, Rockefeller
Brothers Fund, 1997, pp. 5, 25-30.
42. See Rockefeller Foundation website,
43. See "Rockefeller Family Fund" at
44. On both the Trust and the CSPI, see
45. See George Soros, Open Society: Reforming
Global Capitalism, Little Brown & Co., 2000, pp. 330-359.
46. Quoted in Janet Lowe, Ted Turner Speaks, John
Wiley & Sons, 1999, p. 187.