ANTONY SUTTON was a research Fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, from 1968 to 1973. He is a former economics professor at California State University Los Angeles. He was born in London in 1925 and educated at the universities of London, Gottingen and California with a D.Sc. degree from University of Southampton, England.

We offer no objections to their existing clan
No one disputes with them this right, we question but the plan
On which they act, – that only he who wears upon his breast
Their emblem, he for every post shall be considered best.

Anonymous Yale student, 1873.

After 16 books and 25 years in basic research I thought I’d heard it all … the world was a confused mess, probably beyond understanding and certainly beyond salvation – and there was little ‘l could do about it.

Back in 1968 my Western Technology and Soviet Economic Development was published by the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. In three substantial volumes I detailed how the West had built the Soviet Union. However, the work generated a seemingly insoluble puzzle – why have we done this? Why did we build the Soviet Union, while we also transferred technology to Hitler’s Germany? Why does Washington want to conceal these facts? Why have we boosted Soviet military power? And simultaneously boosted our own?

In subsequent books, the Wall Street series, I added more questions – but no answers. I had more or less arrived at the conclusion that there was no rational answer that could be proven.

Then a year or so ago I received an eight-inch batch of documents – nothing less than the membership lists of an American secret society. Glancing through the sheets it was more than obvious – this was no ordinary group. The names spelled Power, with a capital P. As I probed each individual a pattern emerged … and a formerly fuzzy world became crystal clear.

The book you will read here is a combined version of a series reporting on this research. Each volume builds on the previous volume in a logical step-by-step process.

These volumes will explain why the West built the Soviets and Hitler; why we go to war, to lose; why Wall Street loves Marxists and Nazis; why the kids can’t read; why the Churches have become propaganda founts; why historical facts are suppressed, why politicians lie and a hundred other whys.

This series is infinitely more important than the original Western Technology series on technological transfers. If I have a magnum opus, this is it.

ANTONY C. SUTTON
Phoenix, Arizona July 30, 1983

Introduction for 2002 Edition

AMERICAS SECRET ESTABLISHMENT has had an unusual publishing history.

The book began with an anonymous donation to the author of an 8-inch package of documents in the early 1980s. Nothing less than the membership list and supporting documents for a truly secret society the Yale Skull and Bones.

The late Johnny Johnson, of Phoenix Arizona was the spark that moved me to write first a four-part series and later, a jumbo volume based on this material. This volume went to several editions with several publishers, even a Russian edition of 12,000 copies. Probably in the past few years, as many copies have been sold in Russia as in the United States.

America’s Secret Establishment has had little publicity, few reviews ignored by mainline distributors yet, has sold steadily for the past 16 years at a rate of several hundred copies a month.

This activity, in turn, has generated other articles and books by other authors. But my real intent, to generate an exploration of Hegelian influence in modern America, has not been fulfilled. In great part, this can be attributed to an educational system based on a statist-Hegelian philosophy, and which has already achieved the “dumbing down” of America.

This disastrous, destructive philosophy, the source of both Naziism and Marxism, has infected and corrupted our constitutional republic. Much of the blame for this corruption is with an elitist group of Yalie “Bonesmen.” Their symbol of Skull and Bones, and their Hegelian philosophy, says it all, although with typical duplicity, they would have you believe otherwise.

Hegelianism glorifies the State, the vehicle for the dissemination of statist and materialist ideas and policies in education, science, politics and economics.

Wonder why we have a “dumbed-down” society? Look no further than the Bonesman troika who imported the Prussian education system into the U.S. in the 19`h Century. A political philosophy in direct opposition to the classical liberalism nurtured in 19`h Century British and American history. In classical liberalism, the State is always subordinate to the individual. In Hegelian Statism, as we see in Naziism and Marxism, the State is supreme, and the individual exists only to serve the State.

Our two-parry Republican-Democrat (= one Hegelian party, no one else welcome or allowed) system is a reflection of this Hegelianism. A small group – a very small group – by using Hegel, can manipulate, and to some extent, control society for its own purposes.

More than that, reflect on their pirate flag. An emblem found on poison bottles, the symbol of the Nazi Death Head Division in World War Two. Not only did Skull and Bones become a major force in drug smuggling (the Bush and Prescott families in the 1860s), but in true Hegelian fashion, generated the antithesis, the so-called “war on drugs.” This hypocritical policy maintains the price of drugs, controls supply, and puts millions in jail while the gainers, in great part, are none other than the same “Bonesmen” who pass the laws to prohibit (Bonesman Taft, 1904).

Right and Left – A Control Device

For Hegelians, the State is almighty, and seen as “the march of God on earth.” Indeed, a State religion.

Progress in the Hegelian State is through contrived conflict: the clash of opposites makes for progress. If you can control the opposites, you dominate the nature of the outcome.

We trace the extraordinary Skull and Bones influence in a major Hegelian conflict: Naziism vs. Communism. Skull and Bones members were in the dominant decision-making positions – Bush, Harriman, Stimson, Lovett, and so on – all Bonesmen, and instrumental in guiding the conflict through use of “right” and “left.” They financed and encouraged the growths of both philosophies and controlled the outcome to a significant extent. This was aided by the “reductionist” division in science, the opposite of historical “wholeness.” By dividing science and learning into narrower and narrower segments, it became easier to control the whole through the parts.

In education, the Dewey system was initiated and promoted by Skull and Bones members. Dewey was an ardent statist, and a believer in the Hegelian idea that the child exists to be trained to serve the State. This requires suppression of individualist tendencies and a careful spoon-feeding of approved knowledge. This “dumbing down” of American education is not easily apparent unless you have studied in both foreign and domestic U.S. universities – then the contrast becomes crystal clear.

This dumbing down is now receiving attention. Two excellent books are The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America, by Charlotte Thomson Iserbyt (Conscience Press, Revenna Ohio, 2001), and The Dumbing Down of America, by John Taylor Gotta. Both books trace this process to the impact of education, and both give remarkable detail of the process. We go further, in that we trace the import of the system to three Yalies members of Skull & Bones.

For Iserbyt, in The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America, the American education system begins with Rockefeller and Gates. But in fact, this statist system is a reflection of the Hegelian ideas brought to the United States by the Skull and Bones “troika” of Gilman, White and Dwight, and then financed by Rockefeller.

People Control

Today in California, one can see in real time the use of controlled conflict to achieve a desired outcome. The debate over the energy crisis is carefully contained to a debate over price caps and price control. Republicans want no caps and no controls. Most Democrats want price controls through caps.

But look at what is NOT discussed anywhere. The entire spectrum of almost free energy, based on a decade of research is carefully kept out of the discussion. Isn’t this highly relevant to an energy crisis?

In fact, the existence of free energy systems just down the road is the reason for the controlled debate. Mills Blacklight Power now has its patents and some utilities have already bought in. Bearden’s MEG energy from space, is under discussion. Working models exist. The maligned cold fusion has hundreds of successful experiments, but so far as we know, cannot be repeated with sufficient assurance. Other systems have come into the view of government agencies, and then disappear from sight.

A knowing public would ask, Why are these not included in the discussion?” – Simple. Because the utilities know they are for real, and only a few years down the road. The problem for utilities is not the price of energy today, but how to dump their fixed assets (hydro plants, transmission lines, etc.) onto the public. These “valuable” assets will have zero value down the road, because all new systems are stand-alone units which don’t need fixed plant and transmission lines. If the public is aware of the dilemma of the utilities, the ability to dump assets onto the State is heavily reduced.

The Republican-Democrat debate over “caps” is a diversion. The relevant question carefully avoided is, how long will it take to get these new systems into production?

Another example is Monsanto Corporation development of genetic engineering and predator seed, a barely-concealed effort for world domination of agriculture.

President George Bush, Jr. , a Bonesman, appoints a Monsanto vice president, Dr. Virginia Weldon, as Director of Food and Drug Administration, which has the power to block labeling of genetically-engineered foods, and pass on other corporate control efforts.

Just before this, in New Technology, we had the 1989 dramatic announcement of “cold fusion.” When this announcement was made public, President George Bush (also a Bonesman) called establishment scientist the late physicist Seagrum into his office and gave instructions.

We don’t know what was said, but we know what happened. Cold fusion, a valid process for free energy, as was subsequently revealed, was slandered and harassed by the establishment, no doubt fearful of what free energy would do to the oil industry.

What is to be Done?

If the voting public was even vaguely aware of this rampant and concealed scenario, it could, and possibly would force change. However, this is not a likely possibility. Most people are “go-along” types, with limited personal objectives and a high threshold for official misdeeds.

What has taken over a century to establish cannot be changed in a few years. The initial question is education. To eliminate the Hegelian system that stifles individual initiative and trains children to become mindless zombies, serving the State.

We need a lot less propaganda for “education” and a more individual creative search for learning. Instead of more money for education, we need to allocate a lot less. The existing system of education is little more than a conditioning mechanism. It has little to do with education in the true sense, and a lot to do with control of the individual.

It is more likely that time, rather than the voting booth, will erode the secret power of this Yale group, Nothing this outrageous can survive forever.

Antony Sutton

Memorandum Number One: Is There A Conspiracy Explanation For Recent History?

The reader anxious to get into the story of The Order should go directly to Memorandum Number Two. This section concerns methods, evidence and proof. Essential, but perhaps boring for most readers.

During the past one hundred years any theory of history or historical evidence that falls outside a pattern established by the American Historical Association and the major foundations with their grantmaking power has been attacked or rejected – not on the basis of any evidence presented, but on the basis of the acceptability of the argument to the so-called Eastern Liberal Establishment and its official historical line.

The Official Establishment History

There is an Establishment history, an official history, which dominates history textbooks, trade publishing, the media and library shelves. The official line always assumes that events such as wars, revolutions, scandals, assassinations, are more or less random unconnected events. By definition events can NEVER be the result of a conspiracy, they can never result from premeditated planned group action. An excellent example is the Kennedy assassination when, within 9 hours of the Dallas tragedy, TV networks announced the shooting was NOT a conspiracy, regardless of the fact that a negative proposition can never be proven, and that the investigation had barely begun.

Woe betide any book or author that falls outside the official guidelines. Foundation support is not there. Publishers get cold feet. Distribution is hit and miss, or non-existent.

Just to ensure the official line dominates, in 1946 the Rockefeller Foundation allotted $139,000 for an official history of World War Two. This to avoid a repeat of debunking history books which embarrassed the Establishment after World War One. The reader will be interested to know that The Order we are about to investigate had great foresight, back in the 1880s, to create both the American Historical Association and the American Economic Association (most economists were then more historians than analysts) under their terms, with their people and their objectives. Andrew Dickson White was a member of The Order and the first President of the American Historical Association.

Failure of Official History

Times have changed. The weaknesses, inconsistencies and plain untruths in official history have surfaced. In the 1980s it is rare to find a thinking reader who accepts official history. Most believe it has been more or less packaged for mass consumption by naive or greedy historians. Although an historian who will stick out his neck and buck the trend is rare, some who do are victims of an even deeper game. Conspiracy then is an accepted explanation for many events at the intelligent grass roots level, that level furthest removed from the influence of The Order. We can cite at random the Kennedy assassination where the official “lone gunman” theory was never accepted by Americans in the street; Watergate, where a “deep throat” informer and erased tapes reek of conspiracy, and Pearl Harbor, where Rear Admiral Husband E. Kimmel and Major General Walter C. Short took the rap for General George C. Marshall and President Franklin D. Roosevelt.

The revisionist historian has a double burden as well as a double task. The double burden is that research likely to question the official historical line will not get financed. The double task is that research must be more than usually careful and precise.

A non-official work is not going to be judged on its merits. The work will be judged on the basis of its acceptability to a predetermined historical standard. What this standard is we shall explore later.

Hypotheses and Method

Which brings us to methodology. In this volume we will present three hypotheses. What is a hypothesis? A hypothesis is a theory, a working theory, a start point, which has to be supported by evidence. We arrived at these three hypotheses by examining certain documents which will also be described. The official history hatchet mongers will scream that our hypotheses are now being presented as proven assertions – and whatever we write here will not stop the screams. But again, these are only hypotheses at this point, they have to be supported with evidence. They are a first step in a logical research process.

Now in scientific methodology a hypothesis can be proven. It cannot be disproven. It is up to the reader to decide whether the evidence presented later supports, or does not support, the hypotheses. Obviously no one author, critic, or reader can decide either way until all the evidence has been presented.

We also intend to use two other principles of scientific research ignored by official establishment historians.

Firstly, in science the simplest explanation to a problem is always the most acceptable solution. By contrast, in establishment history, a simple answer is usually criticized as “simplistic.” What the critic implies is “The poor writer hasn’t used all the facts,” In other words, it’s a cheap “putdown” without the necessity of providing an alternate answer or additional facts.

Secondly, again in science, an answer that fits the most cases, i.e., the most general answer, is also the most acceptable answer. For example, you have 12 events to explain and a theory that fits 11 of these events. That theory is more acceptable than a theory that fits only 4 or 5 of the events.

The Devil Theory of History

Using this methodology we are going to argue and present detailed precise evidence (including names, dates and places) that the only reasonable explanation for recent history in the United States is that there exists a conspiracy to use political power for ends which are inconsistent with the Constitution.

This is known by the official historians as the “devil theory of history,” which again is a quick, cheap device for brushing facts under the rug. However, these critics ignore, for example, the Sherman Act, i.e., the anti-trust laws where conspiracy is the basic accepted theory. If there can be a conspiracy in the market place, then why not in the political arena? Are politicians any purer than businessmen? Following the antitrust laws we know that conspiracy can only be proven in a specific manner. A similar pattern of market actions is not proof of conspiracy. Just because something looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and all the ducks act similarly, does not make it a duck – or a conspiracy. Under the Sherman Act a similar pattern of prices, where all prices are the same, is not proof of conspiracy. Similarity of prices can occur in a purely competitive market. Neither is similar political action necessarily a conspiracy.

Proof of conspiracy requires specific types of evidence, i.e.,:

(a) there must be secret meetings of the participants and efforts made to conceal joint actions,
(b) those meetings must jointly agree to take a course of action,
(c) and this action must be illegal.

The Council on Foreign Relations

Widely accepted explanations of recent history based on a conspiracy theory do not present evidence that fits the above criteria. For example, the Council on Foreign Relations cannot be claimed as a conspiracy even for the period since its founding in 1921. Membership in the CFR is not a secret. Membership lists are freely available for the cost of a postage stamp. There is no proof that the entire membership conspires to commit illegal acts.

What has to be proven in any conspiracy explanation of history is that the participants have secret groupings, and meet to plan illegal actions.

Members of the CFR, when accused of being involved in a conspiracy, have protested to the contrary. And by and large they are right. Most CFR members are not involved in a conspiracy and have no knowledge of any conspiracy. And some personally known to the author are about the last people on earth to get involved in an illegal conspiracy.

HOWEVER, there is a group WITHIN the Council of Foreign Relations which belongs to a secret society, sworn to secrecy, and which more or less controls the CFR. CFR meetings are used for their own purposes, i.e., to push out ideas, to weigh up people who might be useful, to use meetings as a forum for discussion.

These members are in The Order. Their membership in The Order can be proven. Their meetings can be proven. Their objectives are plainly unconstitutional. And this ORDER has existed for 150 years in the United States.

(End of article)

This is just the first chapter of the book. If you would like to read the rest, you can download and read it from the PDF file.