NED is funded by US Congress and supports ‘activists and scholars’ with 1000 grants in over 90 countries.[341] NED describes its program thus:
From time to time Congress has provided special appropriations to the Endowment to carry out specific democratic initiatives in countries of special interest, including Poland (through the trade union Solidarity), Chile, Nicaragua, Eastern Europe (to aid in the democratic transition following the demise of the Soviet bloc), South Africa, Burma, China, Tibet, North Korea and the Balkans. With the latter, NED supported a number of civic groups, including those that played a key role in Serbia’s electoral breakthrough in the fall of 2000. More recently, following 9/11 and the NED Board’s adoption of its third strategic document, special funding has been provided for countries with substantial Muslim populations in the Middle East, Africa, and Asia.[342]
NED therefore serves as a kind of ‘Comintern’ of the so-called ‘American democratic revolution’ throughout the world. The subversion by the USA, culturally, politically, and economically, with its front-groups, spies, fellow-travellers, activists, and outright revolutionaries, is more far-reaching than the USSR’s allegedly ‘communist’ subversion ever was.
The accusation by the Stalinists at the Moscow Trials of the 1930s was that the Trotskyists were agents of foreign powers and would reintroduce capitalism. The crisis in Marxism caused by the Stalinist regime◦– the so-called ‘betrayal of the revolution’ as Trotsky himself termed it◦– resulted in such outrage among the Trotskyites that they were willing to whore themselves and undertake anything to bring down the Soviet edifice.
V
The Origins of the Cold War:
A fact unrealised by most on both the Right and the Left is that if it was not for Stalin a World State would have been imposed immediately after World War II. The USSR by an irony of history, stood for nationalism against the internationalism of the USA. The USSR was a bastion of conservatism and tradition; while the USA remains a centre of world revolution, the ‘colour revolutions’ sponsored by the National Endowment for Democracy, and many other globalist fronts, being present-day evidence of a process that has been taking place since the internationalist administration of President Woodrow Wilson, his ‘Fourteen Points’ for re-organising the world, and his promotion of the abortive League of Nations, the precursor of the United Nations.
While sections of the American Right, such as the John Birch Society, warned that the United Nations (UN) was a ‘communist plot’ to rule the world, they were correct in their critique of the UN on many points accept one of major importance: it was Stalin who stymied the American globalist plan to use the UN as the basis for a ‘one world government’, a concept that was condemned by the USSR in favour of nationalism.
Russia has never fitted well into the plans of those seeking to impose a uniform system upon humanity. Russia has remained untamed in terms of the sophisticated Western liberals seeking to establish a unipolar global world. Conservative philosophers, especially in Germany, such as Oswald Spengler, despite their opposition to Communism, could see that Bolshevik Russia would soon jettison Marxist dogma and transform into a nationalist state and empire.
Russia’s economy was regarded as backward by Western financiers and many bankers and industrialists not only welcomed the March and the November 1917 Revolutions,[343] but also provided backing for the revolutionaries to overthrow the Czarist regime.[344]
Industrialists and financiers looked optimistically to a post-Czarist Russia with a new government that would embark on industrialization, which implied the need for foreign capital and expertise, regardless of the revolutionary rhetoric about foreign capitalists. However, Stalin, even at this embryonic stage of the Soviet regime, was the spoiler. While Trotsky wished to pursue foreign investment,[345] as had been the case under Lenin’s New Economic Policy,[346]Stalin dealt some swift blows to the broadly termed opposition bloc led by Trotsky, and pursued a course that was not amicable to foreign capital.
With the outbreak of war between Germany and the USSR, there was renewed hope for Russia being integrated into a post war new world order. Stalin relied on Western technology for his war machine in fighting the Germans.[347] However Stalin was not about to become America’s junior partner in a post-war ‘new world order’, despite all the friendly rhetoric that had been spoken during World War II.
Things seemed very jovial between ‘Uncle Joe’,[348] Roosevelt, and Churchill while the common enemy was being fought. Having secured the appeasement of the Allies at Potsdam for the establishment of a new Russian Empire over Eastern Europe and the Baltic states, Stalin was not about to compromise Russia’s position of strength.
The first break in the wartime alliance came with America’s grand new design to establish the United Nations as a world parliament, just as President Woodrow Wilson had tried a similar scheme with the League of Nations after World War I. The American plan for the UN called for power to be vested with the UN General Assembly, based on a parliamentary-type majority vote of the member states, with the USA able to buy the votes with the bribes of foreign aid and loans, such as Marshall Aid. Under such a system the Soviet bloc would have been outvoted and subservient to US policy behind the façade of the ‘international community’. The Soviet position, on the other hand, was to make the UN Security Council the final arbiter of decisions with member states having the right to veto. Andrei Gromyko, Soviet foreign minister, summed up the situation:
The US position in fact allowed the UN to be turned into an instrument for imposing the will of one group of states upon another, above all the Soviet Union as the sole socialist member of the Council.[349]
Despite long standing conservative conspiracy theories regarding the UN being a Soviet plot to create a communist controlled World State,[350] it was the USSR that rendered the UN redundant as a method of imposing a new world order, thanks to the Soviet insistence on national◦– or imperial◦– sovereignty for itself and its power bloc.
The second pillar for the creation of a post-war new world order rested on the supposed ‘internationalisation’ of the awesome power of atomic energy. Like the democratic façade of the American plan for a UN General Assembly world parliament, this ‘internationalisation’ was perceived by the USSR as really meaning US control.
341
‘About NED’, National Endowment for Democracy, http://www.ned.org/about (accessed 7 March 2010).
342
David Lowe, ‘Idea to Reality: NED at 25: Reauthorization’, NED, http://www.ned.org/about/history (accessed 7 March 2010).
343
Jacob H Schiff, ‘Jacob H Schiff Rejoices, By Telegraph to the Editor of the New York Times’, New York Times, March 18, 1917. This can be viewed at The New York Times online archives: http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=9802E4DD163AE532A2575BC1A9659C946696D6CF
Jacob Schiff, ‘Loans easier for Russia’, The New York Times, 20 March 1917. http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=9B04EFDD143AE433A25753C2A9659C946696D6CF
John B Young (National City Bank) ‘Is A People’s Revolution’, The New York Times, March 16 1917.
‘Bankers here pleased with news of revolution’, ibid.
‘Stocks strong◦– Wall Street interpretation of Russian News’, ibid.
344
‘Bolsheviki Will Not Make Separate Peace: Only Those Who Made Up Privileged Classes Under Czar Would Do So, Says Col. W B Thompson, Just Back From Red Cross Mission’, The New York Times, January 27 1918.
345
Armand Hammer of Occidental Petroleum, who had been a concessionaire at the earliest stages of the Soviet regime, stated of his meeting with Trotsky that he was questioned as to how US capitalists regarded Russia as a ‘desirable field for investment?’ Trotsky, having returned from the Urals, thought that the region had great possibilities for American capital. Armand Hammer, Hammer: Witness to History (London: Coronet Books, 1988), 160.
346
Lenin had stated to Hammer: ‘The New Economic Policy demands a fresh development of our economic possibilities. We hope to accelerate the process by a system of industrial and commercial concessions to foreigners. It will give great opportunities to the United State’. Ibid., 143.
347
Antony Sutton, National Suicide: Military Aid to the Soviet Union (New York: Arlington House, 1973).
348
For Roosevelt’s commitment to friendship with Stalin see the CIA essay: Gary Kern, How “Uncle Joe” Bugged FDR, Central Intelligence Agency, https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/csi-studies/studies/vol47no1/article02.html
350
For example, G Edward Griffin, The Fearful Master: A Second Look at the United Nations (Boston: Western Islands, 1964).