The Power Elite

The Greatest Hoax

Charlie Samples

The Unified Conspiracy Theory

There are many who would argue there is no such thing as a “unifying conspiracy”, claiming that history is merely a record of the random path of evolution, the development of civilization into the “post-modern” era of industrial socialism. An excellent exposition on this theme is the book, Who Rules America Now? (1983) by G. William Domhoff, professor of sociology and psychology, upon whom I leaned rather heavily when writing The Last Chuckle

In Professor Domhoff’s own words, it was his purpose to [emphasis mine]

“… present systematic evidence that suggests there is a social upper class in the United States that is a ruling class by virtue of its dominant role in the economy and government. It will be shown that this ruling class is socially cohesive, has a basis in the large corporations and banks, plays a major role in shaping the social and political climate, and dominates the federal government through a variety of organizations and methods.

“The upper class as a whole does not do this ruling. Instead, class rule is manifested through the activities of a wide variety of organizations and institutions. These organizations and institutions are financed and directed by those members of the upper class who have the interest and ability to involve themselves in protecting and enhancing the privileged social position of their class. Leaders within the upper class join with high-level employees in the organizations they control to make up what will be called the power elite. This power elite is the leadership group of the upper class, for not all members of the upper class are members of the power elite and not all members of the power elite are members of the upper class. It is members of the power elite who take part in the processes that maintain the class structure.”

G. William Domhoff
Who Rules America Now?

While that appears correct, insofar as it goes, Domhoff’s thesis has its shortcomings. His book contains factual and analytical obfuscation. Key elements are left out: racial, ethnic, cultural and religious data are carefully avoided. He simply refuses to look in certain places. That is clearly unscientific; one might say, unhistorical. But then, Domhoff never raises the question, “How did the power elite rise to power?” As a sociologist, his job is merely defining the social structure and behavior of this particular social class, leaving it to the historian or the anthropologist to explain how they came to be. As such, he may comfortably presume that the elite have always been in control; that they either inherited this power, or they married into it or they had bought their way in.

Money is the primary determinant of class in his study, together with membership in certain types of organization, but not others. Masonic Lodges, B’nai B’rith, the National Academy of Sciences and the National Security Council are all too conspicuously absent, though Domhoff does observe the Council on Foreign Relations, and shows particular interest in the Business Council. His presentation begs the solution that we now empower a third estate — the academic research community, the intellectual elite — to engineer the necessary social changes that will produce Justice, meaning that academe will henceforth arbitrate disputes arising from the inevitable abuse of authority by this “power elite”. Of course, that would also include the question of standing, the determination of whether a particular complaint is even acknowledged to exist. [Thus we can be assured future acts of terrorism.] One must admit that the proposition carries with it a certain gravity, a sense of inevitability, as though we were getting it anyhow.

As to the question, “How does one become a member of the power elite?”, Domhoff implies: “Go to a proper boarding school, then to Harvard, earn a Ph.D., seek positions of influence and power, and join the right social clubs.” … And exactly what are these “social clubs” to which he refers? Domhoff suggests that their primary membership is drawn from the Social Register, and that their function is to enforce certain upper-class values and social attitudes, and to provide an atmosphere where “new ideas” can be floated like “trial balloons” … something like a Bourgeois Lodge, with branch temple-resorts in Aspen, St. Moritz and Cannes. One might suppose a highly-paid entertainer, a supermodel or a famous athlete would equally qualify for membership. And of course, the media is ever-present.

Domhoff indicates that the appreciation of real estate values through the intensification of land usage has always been a private concern of the upper class, especially at the local political level. Perhaps this explains our municipal planners’ insatiable appetite for multi-culturalism, their love for immigration and incessant proselytizing about the “benefits” of a world without borders — only property rights and the intensification of land usage.

What’s amazing in all of this is that Domhoff’s thesis is based entirely upon the classic Marxist ideal of class conflict, to the exclusion of racial, cultural or religious concerns. And in this respect, the “politically correct” upper class of American society do certainly dance to the piper’s tune. In other words, Domhoff’s theory of social elitism and the Unified Conspiracy Theory are not mutually exclusive models. We simply propose to look a bit deeper.

Who are the “power elite” and what is their agenda?

Observe how differently the professor’s statement of purpose reads when one substitutes the words Freemason, Zionist, Marxist, Jew, Communist, Mobster, Tycoon, Capitalist, Socialist or Technocrat for the hypothetical and faceless term “power elite” – “those with the interest and ability to involve themselves … with high-level employees in the organizations they control … [to become] the leadership group of the upper class.”

The leadership group of the upper class … not all of whom are even members of the upper class.”

I had to read those lines many times over, before their true meaning began to sink in. Of course. The way to join the “power elite” is to become a leader — a trend setter — of upper class attitudes, social values and beliefs. The upper class are influenced through the medium of cultural, religious and educational institutions.

Observe how the media, academe, churches and philanthropic institutions today are overwhelmingly socialist, globalist and Marxist (especially in terms of “developed” and “underdeveloped” nations). There is a clear agenda at work. Now observe how Domhoff refers to these institutions as being financed and directed by the “power elite”. At this point, they may as well be named — in fact, they are. You only need to look, and see who are the donors, trustees and beneficiaries of our greatest philanthropies and shudder. And yet so many of you are afraid to look, and count. The veil is lifting.

This “socio-political” agenda has been accomplished through the manipulation of our culture, by rewriting history, by applying praise and guiltmaking the upper class “feel good” about themselves when they behave in the “politically-correct” manner. Such conditioning is possible when a cabal has achieved significant influence within academe and the media. You see, the wealthy are really just sheeple like you and me. They generally think and act in exactly the way they believe they are supposed to behave. One simply applauds the very mediocrity of the upper class … the more mediocre they are, the more accolade they are given. Lady Spencer (a.k.a. “Princess” Diana) and Ted Turner are splendid examples of this. Men of genius are as rare among the upper class as they are among the commons.

Support from within the upper class is essential to the success of any cultural, political or religious movement; there has never been a case in history where this is not true. If a cabal for world dominion does exist, we would expect to find it operating within our cultural, educational and religious institutions – all of which are being drawn into academe – and functioning in both capacities: inculcating the upper class with a desired set of social attitudes, and also purging these institutions of unwanted contrary influence (men of genius, especially those with Western cultural, racial or religious awareness). Weed out the latter, construct barriers between genius and the wealthy, between the wealthy and the soul of their people, and the upper class will naturally become a Bourgeois.

The existence of the “political-correctness” movement within academe is evidence that such a conspiracy does indeed exist. Consider the following events, resulting from Lee Bass’ 1991 endowment of $20 million to Yale University in order to finance 7 tenured professors ($14 mil), 2 associates ($2 mil), and to provide logistical support ($4 mil):

“When in 1995, Yale returned $20 million given by Lee Bass to form a Western Civilization studies program, President Richard Levin claimed that logistical difficulties made implementing the project unfeasible and expensive. Recent developments in Yale’s curriculum now call this into question.

“Yale’s approval of the new Ethnicity, Race, and Migration (ER&M) major on March 6 [1997] codifies the highly politicized nature of Yale’s curricular policy. Over the past few years this policy has repeatedly thwarted attempts to bolster Western Civilization programs while encouraging ER&M and Gay Studies majors. Those administrative obstacles supposedly fatal to the Bass proposal have not blocked the other two programs.

Avik S. Roy: Race Studies Trump the Canon from Light & Truth (a Yale publication)

The rejected Bass grant represents more than just the careers of seven professors and two associates – presumably white native American males and their dependent families – that might have been; it also represents their would-have-been protegés, the cumulative impact of their respective careers. The impact upon our posterity will certainly be greater than the loss of a football stadium. And it passed with hardly a whimper.

Is it mere coincidence that Yale President Richard Levin is a Jew? Of course, one must never use that word; so we simply look the other way. And so, while the upper class in America are entrained upon trivial self-congratulation, they become increasingly predictable – increasingly controllable – precisely because of their mediocrity and conformism. That was essentially the method used by Mordecai and his niece Esther to gain control over King Ahasuerus in theBook of Esther.

This is the main theme of Dostoyevsky’s novel, The Possessed, about how a few manipulative individuals can wreak havoc within a Gentile social structure.

It is also, for that matter, the methodology of the Protocols. Especially if one can keep the wealthy very busy and self-absorbed, and nearly harassed with socialist nicety, gossip and telescopic philanthropy, they will be incapable of mounting a serious resistance to any outside agenda — even the most diabolical form of national subversion — simply because they won’t be able to see it.

In a more modern perspective, if a cabal can gain control over the institutions of national culture, and thereby manipulate the attitudes and beliefs of the upper class, subversion of the nation will follow. So goes the theory. Now for the test: has anything like this actually occurred in the United States? Who are the “power elite”, and what is their relationship with the upper class?

The key identifiers are clearwho are in control of the media, culture (entertainment) and academe?

Who created the media?

Who are the biggest advertisers?

Who control the foundations?

Who are the writers, professors, composers and thinkers?

Who are the directors, programmers and editors?

Who are producing the “educational” propaganda that is being spoon-fed our youngsters?

These questions are easy enough to answer – often as simple as reading the credits at the end of a movie or TV program – and yet how few sheeple even dare to look?

Are we afraid to see that the financiers, organizers and policy-makers are primarily Jews and their minions, and that all of these are globalist, internationalist, multicultural, pro-Zionist and Technocrats? That they are all seeking the classic Marxist one-world government? Our social, cultural and educational institutions are all interconnected, they share a common goal, and they all exclude dissent. Professor Domhoff refers to these, collectively, as the “opinion shaping and policy making network”.

One can also observe that this same cadre of internationalists have held directorships, political appointments and key cabinet positions in Federal administrations from the time of Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson to the present; many are also members of the Council on Foreign Relations, but of more immediate concern are the National Security Council, the Secretaries of Treasury and Defense, the International Space Agency and the National Academy of Sciences (all controlled by Jews); that they are financed by — and interconnected with — the central banking firms, stock exchanges, multinationals and universities; that they represent the interests of the importers, the distributors, merchandisers and finance agents; that they are also among the largest developers and institutional property-owners … and so many of them – in America – are Jews. The veil is lifting.

As one proceeds downward in his study of the power structure as it exists today, from the apex to the base of the pyramid, to examine state and local governments, chambers of commerce, law firms, party bosses, union leaders, political activists and social scientists, teachers, media owners, advertisers, civil defense and communications, doctors and psychologists, committee-persons, planning boards, arts and cultural organizers … our reader should get the point. The same pattern emerges … and once again, an almost-complete absence of dissent!

It is that silence of dissent that is so convincing. It is so very near complete, there is but the faintest wail. You can hear it in Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, which postulates a time when no one will have the opportunity to be heroic, when great art will be sacrificed on the altar of universal happiness. Children will be bred by the state and conditioned to feel happy in their pre-assigned social roles. That was in 1932. Much of what he predicted has already occurred. You can hear it in Dostoyevsky, The Possessed, where “long-eared” Shigalov (the genius!) calculates how a tenth of humanity will someday enjoy complete freedom over the other nine-tenths, who are happy to be bred-down to the level of beasts.

“We shall strangle every genius in infancy!” … “It will be the Garden of Eden!” That was written in 1872, more than twenty years before the infamous Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion. Interestingly, Shatov, the character who dared speak the truth about nationalist-religion, was ritually murdered to “cement” the subversive cell. Dostoyevsky knew.

We can see that the work of Professor Domhoff and his colleagues, who are sociologists, psychologists and primarily Israelites, is far from irrelevant. Quite the contrary, their research is most enlightening – one might even say critical to our understanding the situation in which we find ourselves – so long as we are aware that they have an interest in deflecting our attention away from the significance of the fact that they are Jews.

The veil is lifting, and the closer we approach the nexus of power, the more frequently we encounter Jews and their lackeys: feminists, minority activists and spineless liberal professors – the classic Marxist coalition. We must bear in mind that nearly a third of all Freemasons are also Jews; and that from the time of the Blackstone Memorial, Freemasonry has been actively pro-Zionist; neither shall we forget B’nai B’rith.

One must also observe how, at the highest institutional levels, the power of Freemasonry has been largely overthrown from its preeminence of two hundred years past. The fall of Freemasonry has been matched by a corresponding rise in the power and prestige of the Jews, and of their centrality within cultural, scientific and educational institutions. It is as though the power structure that had been built by Freemasonry had become crystalized, institutionalized, and the Jews have quietly slid into the driver’s seat, inviting in all of their friends.

Look around, and bear in mind that the objective of the cabal is not just to achieve dominion, but to preserve that Dominion by breeding us down.

Why is our homeland overrun by hordes of third-world opportunists? Who threw open our borders and invited these peoples in? Why did President Clinton proclaim to the United States, and to the world, that we must prepare for the next century “when whites will be the minority in America”?

Who wants this? America has been turned into New Babylon — or B-A-B-A-L-O-N, the multicultural “melting-pot” – making us into the ideal environment for Galuth, the Diaspora Jews. The Jew prospers in America today as nowhere else in the world. Is this purely by chance?

What is this “America” of which our President speaks? Will it include Puerto Rico, Mexico, Cuba, Jamaica, Haiti and the Dominican Republic? Canada, the Philippines and Taiwan?

Why have our cities been turned into barrios that more resemble ethnic occupation-zones?

Who is behind all of this?

How did the power of bestowing citizenship come to reside within the Department of Justice, the agency that is farthest removed from the people, and which is now literally running out of control?

Why does the Fourteenth Amendment still contain wording that disfranchises anyone opposed to federalism (and internationalism)?

Why has there never been a national referendum in the United States on immigration policy?

Why is our media so biased against our own native and racial interest?

Who are teaching our children to say: “We are a nation of immigrants and they have a right to be here”?

Who control PBS, PRI (Public Radio International), the Learning Channel and educational TV?

Who started calling the North American Indians “Native Americans”, as though the rest of us are not native Americans ourselves?

Why are our “American” universities overflowing with aliens and foreigners, even as we are shackled with taxes to subsidize them?

Why is there no public recognition that we are being dispossessed from our homeland?

Why have our own women and children been turned against us?

Why must we suffer the fate of Rome, of Babylon and Egypt?

Who are the people that are financing and directing this network of predatory institutions? If one is going to go to such lengths to pull the strings of an innocent people and strip them of their homeland, there must be some kind of agenda behind it. One doesn’t do such things for sport.

Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor, that twin cities frame.
“Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!” cries she
With silent lips. “Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”Emma Lazarus
The New Colossus

In so many words, Emma is showing us the answer: her image of the “Mother of Exiles” standing at our gates, inviting the refuse of the world to enter in. Who is this “Mother of Exiles”? Who put that damned statue outside our harbor and called it the “golden door”? A harbor is a place of refuge, but not a permanent abode. The “golden door” is something altogether different. Is there an intentional twist of poetic irony in all of this, something like the fabled Trojan Horse, but infinitely more malevolent? Maybe we are the bigger fools, to have let someone else give away our homeland. To whom and for what?

We do know that Emma Lazarus was a Jewess and a committed Zionist, her father a wealthy New York sugar refiner (which industry still employs the lowest-paid workers in the world). Who else could this “New Colossus” – this “Mother of Exiles” – be than the Golah, the “Deserted Wife” of Isaiah, beckoning her children to follow, and to “set firm their stakes”. She is also the Jew standing at our gates, inviting the peoples of the world to enter in. To them she isB-A-B-A-L-O-N, the “melting pot”, Queen of the City of the Pyramids. Her number is an hundred and fifty-six. Six times twenty-six. The number of Zion is also an hundred and fifty-six. Is this all coincidence?

Yet surely, the Jews are the “Mother of all Exiles”. Perhaps we have too quickly assumed that Emma Lazarus was merely a bad poetess. We may have been fooled. Read her poem again, in light of its title, The New Colossus. This is not to be an empire built by valiant arms, as had the ancient Greeks and Romans. This New Colossus is an empire built by way of deception, trickery and betrayal, by means of stealth and irredentism. These are the ways of the god of Jacob. The statue of “Liberty Enlightening the World” was the gift of French Jacobites, given in 1886, the fourth year of the Jewish exodus to the United States. She cradles a plaque in her arm, like Moses the Ten Commandments, inscribed with the numeral “1776” as though to commemorate the American Revolution. That plaque represents the equality polemic of the Declaration of Independence …

“That all men are created equal”

… and it should be borne in mind that, at the time those words were written, the Revolutionary War was already in full-swing, and the purpose of the Declaration of Independence was to muster the support of the commons behind the already-selected leaders. It was not necessary that those leaders actually believe their own propaganda.

Be that as it may, in the final analysis, the “Equality Polemic” tends to deny the existence of both “national rights” (as in a homeland) and individual rights, in order to assert its own ideal of “Human Rights”, which are to be shared “equally” by all world-citizens.

It was this equality polemic that Charles Sumner and the Illuminati wished to elevate to equal standing with the Constitution, and together with international treaties, as the Law of the Land. The plaque represents Human Rights, the banner of the Society for Ethical Culture, organized as the Humanist Church of Man (Woman).

The symbol of the imprisoned lightning represents the feminist usurpation of the male creative spirit, one of the occult secrets of Mystery Babylon. The Statue of Liberty was erected in the year 1886, the centennial of 1786, the year before the “Constitutional” convention was foisted upon our forefathers. It was the year when the Federalist conspiracy was set in motion, when the State of Virginia refused to honor the five percentum under the Articles of Confederation because the international bankers had been caught tampering with the books. The 1786-1886 centennial represents the betrayal of the American Revolution.

Why does Emma use the words, “our sea-washed, sunset gates” in line three? Who is “we”? New York is on our (white native American) eastern coast. Why the sunset? Emma’s “we” is clearly not us native Americans. Are these “sunset gates” to be opened for something to be brought in, or for something else to emerge? Perhaps both? The western is the sunset coast, and sunset beckons the night.

For, behold, darkness shall cover the earth,
And gross darkness the peoples;
But upon thee the Lord will arise,
And His glory shall be seen upon thee.
And nations shall walk at thy light,
And kings at the brightness of thy rising.
Lift up thine eyes round about, and see:
They all are gathered together, and come to thee;
Thy sons come from far,
And thy daughters are borne on the side.
Then thou shalt see and be radiant,
And thy heart shall throb and be enlarged;
Because the abundance of the sea shall be turned unto thee,
The wealth of the nations shall come unto thee.

Isaiah 60:2-5
According to the Masoretic Text

What a perfect companion to Emma Lazarus’ poem. Or vice versa; a perfect match. What spectacular imagery, the Mother of Exiles lighting the way for her children in the darkness of night. The image of Columbia leading the proletarian masses, and the Illuminati who named the Seat of their government the “District of Columbia”. Oh my, have we been fooled?

Of all the possibilities that had existed for our people – our forefathers – two hundred and fifty years ago, why has it come down to this? Is it so impossible to imagine that we might have closed our borders at any time? That we could have preserved our heritage and developed a culture and a homeland of our own? The ancient Romans, whose origins were remarkably similar to ours, had managed to do so for many centuries, up until the time they became an empire. During the earlier period of the Republic, they guarded their citizenship so jealously that they fought against their own allies in the Marsian Wars to make that point. Yet we treat our own “citizenship” as if it were a cheap entitlement to be handed out in a world lottery.

Whose idea was it that the United States be made into an empire – Columbia (another name for America) – with the full knowledge that this would mean the destruction of our freedom, that we suffer the fate of ancient Rome? That we be stripped of our heritage and boiled down in the “melting pot” of race-mixing, as though we were common ingredients for a mad witch’s brew? And to what purpose? To breed the new world-proletariat?

The great achievements of Western Civilization were made possible by what the ancient Romans called dignitas. It means the pride of a people in their ancestry, their heritage and their culture. It is for this reason that the aristocracy shared, and sometimes enforced, a “dominant” culture on their people. To be a Roman was to have dignitas. It meant holding to a higher standard than barbarians and savages. It meant discipline and sacrifice, and these virtues were embodied in every aspect of their culture. The ancient Roman aristocracy understood that they maintained the strength and character of their people, their dignitas, through upholding their inherited culture.

In America, the upper class have pursued an entirely different agenda than past Western Civilization. Our elite have renounced their responsibility to their own race, and sold out for the bogus utopia of socialism and multiculturalism as a cover for Bourgeois self-gratification. They have literally turned upon their own people, and leant themselves to the construction of this vast machinery of socialization that now oppresses us. It is precisely this change in attitude among the upper class that beckons the sunset of civilization, for which Emma had so yearned.

In America, the condition appears to have been prematurely induced. Our concept of “heritage” was systematically undermined, and replaced by its antithesis – the “melting pot”. And so the thought of conspiracy looms over us. The issue to be resolved, then, is this: Is there a central, unifying conspiracy of such significance that it has been able to alter the course of history?

This writer maintains that there is.  (read more here)