Table Of ContentConspiracy In History . . . as seen by:
"I consider this insurrection as the first formidable fruit of the Democratic
Societies . . . instituted by artful and designing members [of Congress].... I
see, under a display of popular and fascinating guises, the most diabolical
attempts to destroy . . . the government."
George Washington
The so-called Democratic Clubs "are so perfectly affiliated to the Parisian
Jacobins that their origin from a common parent cannot possibly be mistaken."
John Quincy Adams
"There is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so
interlocked, so complete, so pervasive that they better not speak above their
breath when they speak in condemnation of it."
Woodrow Wilson
"This [Federal Reserve] act establishes the most gigantic trust on earth ....
When the President signs this act the invisible government by the money
powers, proven to exist by the Money Trust investigation, will be legalized."
Charles A. Lindbergh Sr.
"If the isolationists had known the full extent of the secret alliance between
the United States and Britain, their demands for the President's impeachment
would have rumbled like thunder through the land."
F.D.R. biographer Robert Sherwood
"If you like conspiracy theories about secret plots to take over the world,
you are going to love the administration of Jimmy Carter."
Washington Post
"David Rockefeller is the most conspicuous representative today of the
ruling class .... But what some critics see as a vast international conspiracy, he
considers a circumstance of life, and just another day's work."
Bill Moyers on public television
The lust for power is not as widely understood as is the desire for fame and
fortune. Perhaps some who have obtained great notoriety feel they are entitled
to rule, or that control of others is the only sensation remaining in a jaded
existence. Whatever the case, those afflicted with this consuming passion are
responsible for most of the wars, slavery, and human misery throughout the
history of the world.
The subjects of this book are those who have adopted a more sophisticated
approach to power than outright conquest. They employ all the techniques of
intrigue, subversion, and conspiracy to manipulate authority from behind the
scenes, and share the goal of a "New World Order" or a global superstate to
consolidate control of humanity.
It is not just some mysterious "they" but specific and often well-known in-
dividuals and organizations described in these pages. Mr. Hoar has, from solid
historical sources, provided an intriguing and scholarly examination of these
conspirators — beginning with the French Revolution and continuing through
the American Revolution, the Civil War, Reconstruction, robber barons and
banking conspirators, the two World Wars ... and bringing the reader right up to
the contemporary machinations of the Trilateralists. It makes fascinating
reading; but, more than that, this book represents the one thing those who
operate in the dark fear most — exposure to the light.
A native of Massachusetts, William Patrick Hoar was graduated from
Bowdoin College in 1967, served as a Drill Sergeant in the United States
Army, and has traveled from the Arctic Circle to North Africa, from behind
the Iron Curtain to the Orient.
Mr. Hoar is a Contributing Editor to American Opinion, the international
Conservative monthly journal of political affairs in which more than one
hundred of his articles have appeared. His commentaries, reviews, and feature
articles are published regularly in The Review Of The News, the national
weekly newsmagazine for which Mr. Hoar is an Associate Editor and where
for thirteen years he has also written a popular weekly column.
William Hoar, his wife Louisa, and their three-year-old daughter Meredith
make their home near Boston.
Table of Contents
Author's Preface ix
Introduction by A. Clifford Barker xiii
I American Republic And French Revolution 1
II Industrial Revolution: Freeing The Market 13
III Manifest Destiny 24
IV Reconstruction: Carpetbaggers And Scalawags 34
V Robber Barons: Moguls And Manipulation 44
VI Anarchists Reviewed 56
VII Andrew Carnegie: A Prototype And A Legacy 68
VIII The Watershed Year: 1913 80
IX The Great War 91
X Versailles Treaty And The League Of Nations 108
XI Enterprise Of Henry Ford 119
XII Charles A. Lindbergh, Father And Son 129
XIII Fascism And National Socialism 144
XIV A Brief On Populism 157
XV The Progressive Deal Of Herbert Hoover 167
XVI The Great Depression 180
XVII Hitler-Stalin Pact 192
XVIII Betraying Poland 203
XIX First Two Terms Of Franklin D. Roosevelt 213
XX F.D.R. At War 225
XXI An Inquiry Concerning Churchill 236
XXII The Truth About Truman 250
XXIII Police Action In Korea 263
XXIV Presidents Before "Watergate" 275
XXV Human Cost Of Communism In Indochina 288
XXVI Soviet Summit Synopses 301
XXVII New World Order 314
XXVIII Admissions Of The Trilateral Commission 325
Selected Bibliography 337
Index 347
Author's Preface
HISTORY doesn't just happen. Men have deliberate goals for which they strive
individually and collectively, the results of which — regardless of the success
of their missions — become history. Private ambitions and public posturings
are seldom the same, so it is healthy to be wary of the ostentatiously altruistic.
It was not without reason that Henry David Thoreau prepared to flee whenever
he heard that someone was on the way to do him good.
That man is flawed, fallible, and roguish is no surprise to any outside the
nursery, and it should not be shocking that the collective record seems worse
than the sum of the parts. The historian Edward Gibbon had a professional
understanding of the game, complaining that history is often "little more than
the register of the crimes, follies and misfortunes of mankind."
Such a registration by name, date, and place has frequently been all that the
"accidentalists" want to discuss, ignoring the questions of why the world is run
the way that it is, how, and by whom. Culpability is assigned by the winners, for
the men who run things know what they are doing and do it anyway. Feathering
one's own nest is applied in the making of history, economics, politics,
sociology, psychology, and morality. It is also applied in writing about them.
As Adam Smith observed two centuries ago in The Wealth Of Nations: "It is
not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we
expect our dinner, but from their regard to their self-interest." So it is with
history and the historians.
The currents beneath the surface are usually the strongest and determine
direction, while the casual observer sees but the reflections on top. With this in
mind, we set out in the writing of these chapters to see and make
x Architects Of Conspiracy
clear to our readers what had been made murky by years of fashionable
obfuscation.
Have men conspired throughout the ages? Have they cheated and pillaged,
inflated and warred, and then labored to have the best light shone upon their
motives? Such questions answer themselves, but apparently must be repeatedly
asked. For, as Edmund Burke expressed it: "People will not look forward to
posterity who never look backward to their ancestors." Or inward to
themselves.
Some will say that the evidence here or there in this survey is only
circumstantial, or that some case is not sufficiently made because the
perpetrators didn't plead guilty. To suggest that conspiracy might have been
involved would be too, well, too revisionist. But the long arm of coincidence
can only stretch so far. Propaganda is expected to fool most of the people
some of the time, so one can only ask the honest reader to be at least equally
skeptical of Establishment interpretation. Circumstantial? Take all the proof
presented here, collate it with experience, and remember with Thoreau that
"some circumstantial evidence is very strong, as when you find a trout in the
milk."
Of course, this book does have a point of view; there is a leitmotiv. Human
nature being what it is, few will enjoy being reminded of the vast evil at large in
the world. During the French Revolution, for instance, the conspirator Mirabeau
seriously declared that liberty "should have for her bed mattresses of corpses."
Accordingly, at one time, the French revolutionists had plans to kill half the
population — just as was done by their Twentieth Century successors in
Cambodia! The framers of the American Constitution, on the other hand, saw
the terrible potential for collective evil and labored to avoid what George
Washington called the "leveling principles." The runaway "turbulence and
follies of democracy," in Edmund Randolph's phrase, must be resisted.
That is why Randolph urged the Constitutional Convention to "check . . .
and to restrain, if possible, the fury of Democracy." Gouverneur Morris, our
Minister to France during its bloody gyrations in the name of equality, actually
called the unrestrained masses of people a "reptile." Jefferson realized: "In
questions of power ... let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him
down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution." As the historians
Charles and Mary Beard put it in 1939, "when the Constitution was framed no
respectable person called himself a democrat." Which is why they created the
Republic for which we stand.
It is that Republic which conspirators have been laboring to wreck and
submerge into a New World Order, or an all-powerful United Nations, or some
way station of regional government. It would be, we are told when we dare to
demand an answer, for our own benefit. Despots just love to
Author's Preface xi
do good, the means to that end notwithstanding. Take John Dewey, the demigod
of the "Liberal" Education Establishment. In 1916, in Ethics, Dewey
maintained that whether the use of force "is justifiable or not. . . is in
substance, a question of efficiency (including economy) of means in the
accomplishing of ends . . . . The criterion of value lies in the relative
efficiency and economy of the expenditure of force as a means to an end."
Bowing to bare efficiency is still obsequity.
Consider the founder of the American Civil Liberties Union, Roger Baldwin,
who in 1935 admitted: "Communism is the goal." By age 96, in 1981, he had
evolved this notion to a contention that "world order, a one-world order, is
necessary to human survival." One is also reminded of John Adams's writings
to Thomas Jefferson: Rousseau and other revolutionary philosophers, said
Adams, "preached to the French nation liberty, until they made them the most
mechanical slaves; equality till they destroyed all equity; humanity till they
became weasels and African panthers; and fraternity till they cut one another's
throats like Roman gladiators."
How much better were the results of following the truly revolutionary
precepts of Adam Smith. He did not appeal to the benevolence of bakers and
butchers, you will recall. "We address ourselves," Smith said, "not to their
humanity, but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our necessities, but of
their advantages." The consequence was the freed marketplace and the
Industrial Revolution that lifted millions in the West from squalor.
Time and again, however, statists and worshippers of big government
reemerge, much like the Lernaean Hydra with multiple heads replacing each
that is beaten back. Jose Ortega y Gasset rightly saw the greatest danger
threatening civilization as "State intervention" which is "the absorption of all
spontaneous social action by the State," and which can lead only to the people
being "converted into fuel to feed the mere machine which is the State." As he
predicted in 1930 in The Revolt Of The Masses: "The result of this tendency
will be fatal. Spontaneous social action will be broken up over and over again by
State intervention; no new seed will be able to fructify. Society will have to
live for the State, man for the governmental machine."
Government is at root simple force and/or the threat of using it. Too much
government has sapped us, just as Alexis de Tocqueville anticipated: "The will
of man is not shattered, but softened, bent, and guided; men are seldom forced
by it to act, but they are constantly restrained from acting. Such a power does
not destroy, but it prevents existence; it does not tyrannize, but it compresses,
enervates, extinguishes, and stupefies a
xii Architects Of Conspiracy
people, till each nation is reduced to nothing better than a flock of timid and
industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd."
There are those who are enervated by the fear of stigma, of not being seen
as an orthodox interpreter of history, of being accused of seeing incipient
totalitarians plotting under the beds. In the name of modernism, however, it is
they who surrender skepticism. They will look at our long list of national and
international "errors" and deny even the possibility that the fix is in. From the
top, Establishment historians will contend that none of this happened because
men connived to make it happen. The less such popinjays of the hour know
about what they scoff at as the "conspiracy theory" — as if there were one set
by dogma — the more they disavow its validity.
If everyone on your side of the street says, for instance, that the Emperor
has such a fine set of clothes, and how nice it is that he has recorded its details
with the People's Academy of Haphazard History, you may think it odd to note
in the face of official history to the contrary that the Emperor is naked as a
jaybird. There really is none so blind as the man who will not see. Moreover, as
Machiavelli pointed out: "One who deceives will always find those who allow
themselves to be deceived."
* * *
A word on style: Most material in this book appeared over a decade, from
1975 to 1984, in a different format in American Opinion magazine. The
emphasis has been on making the information flow in a popular and readable
fashion rather than to litter the landscape with legions of op. cits. and other
paraphernalia of merely academic tomes. By incorporating cited works into the
body of this history we have sought to minimize the page-turning to minute
type. A bibliography of volumes referred to in the text is included at the back.
Finally, let me add my gratitude to my parents, John P. Hoar and Helen R.
Hoar; my friend and Editor, Scott Stanley Jr.; and, my wife, Louisa Miller
Hoar.
W.P.H.
Arlington, Massachusetts August 1984
Introduction
THOSE CONSPIRATORS who would by degrees reduce the sovereignty of the
United States of America to raise in its stead a New World Order are the
subjects of this intriguing yet scholarly work by William P. Hoar. Writing of
such machinations, of the movers and shakers conspiring behind the scenes,
the author indicates that, because of exposure by Conservatives, members of the
Trilateral Commission (as one example) now comprise "anything but a
conspiracy of silence; it is in fact a relatively open collusion of the powerful,
and brazen enough to own up to at least some of its aims. These admissions
against interest need examining."
Indeed. Consider how these people manipulate government. One name that
springs to mind is that of international banker James P. Warburg. His father had
been the chief architect of the Federal Reserve System. He was himself an early
New Dealer; at age thirty-five, he was president of the International Acceptance
Bank, with its interlocks to the Morgans, Rockefellers, and the funding of the
Bolshevik Revolution; and, by 1932, he was director of the Bank of
Manhattan. Warburg was in charge of American propaganda during World War
II; supported universal disarmament after the war as well as the United World
Federalists; and, was not only a member of the Council on Foreign Relations
but also was a trustee of the Institute for Policy Studies, an important and
influential Marxist think-tank in Washington, D.C. In short, here was a man
who knew how policy was made. He admitted in his 1966 book The United
States In The Postwar World that:
There is a group of " . . . bankers, industrialists, businessmen, lawyers and
educators who are now and then consulted informally by the White House.
Some two hundred of these prominent citizens, in various parts of the country,
most of whom are on first-name terms with each other and communicate with
each other by telephone, might appropriately be called
