NAZI Bargain And The Post-War Order
Did the WW2 settlement cloak plans to revive the fascist project?
See also Part Two: Quandt And The Post-War Order: Did the WW2 settlement cloak plans to revive the fascist project?
Oct 26, 2021
Some stories are better told with the techniques of fiction and I only recently discovered why: they require the full imaginative capacity. They are so far beyond our expectations of daily life that to comprehend them calls on the part of our brain that houses the creative unconscious — both reader and author need to access it.
This is nothing new. The old media uses this technique in the features section, and news magazines from Time to The Economist use something like a short story format to create an impression of entirety, that ties every loose end and leaves no doubt in the reader’s mind. I mean something different: look for characters and plot as you read, and not mere sequences of information.
The first step you must take seems radical: forget what you were taught because we were schooled to distrust imagination and not to question. The best-selling book on WW2 for many years (and it’s never been out of print) is Hugh Trevor-Roper’s The Last Days of Hitler (1947). His books on the Elizabethans are good. His works on WW2 and the NAZIs are living examples of the dictum that history is written by the victors, and are products of British military intelligence. 
This research takes two sections (at least) beginning with the war settlement. It is necessary to work backwards, through reverse chronology.
The deal makers
Why did some NAZI enterprises get shut down and others survive, some tycoons face the Nuremberg dock and others not, and who decided which scientists to ship off to the United States and grant citizenship?
Take a step back and recognize that the NAZI project was a huge moneymaker. American companies like General Electric, IBM, Ford, DuPont and Rockefeller’s Standard Oil of New Jersey (the biggest sub-unit after its break-up) all traded with the enemy for most of the war. As it was ending, the Allies determined not to repeat the mistake of the Versailles Treaty and impose onerous reparations. They felt it was more important to rebuild Germany as a bulwark against the Soviet Union.
The huge wealth plundered from other nations by the NAZIs was not returned in full and much of it disappeared, filtered away — or maintained as a war chest for future globalist projects?
Part of the NAZI wealth was liquid but some was locked in industrial enterprises. This may be why certain families kept possession of their industrial holdings. They could not flee to Switzerland, the United States, Brazil or Argentina. And these companies, like the 200 owned by the Quandt family including BMW, were considered essential. The families were left alone, especially if they were the next generation and could put some distance between themselves and the Reich.
The planning may have gone further, however. Was there another motive for this continuity and did someone hope for the revival of the NAZI project or its continuation in another format? The evidence suggests that some did.
The plan for a United States of Europe dated from the interwar years, if not earlier, when French and German fascists dreamt of uniting the two countries. 
Yet according to the U.K. Daily Telegraph's Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, the supranational regime “always was an American project.” By the time of WW2 the biggest global banks and corporations were rivaling nation states for influence. They had little use for the Westphalian system of nation states and, in the 1940s and 50s, saw greater use in breaking down borders and the tariffs and onerous customs duties that went with them.
They worked to unite Europe under a single government — “the evidence is all over the congressional record,” write Rick Biondi, of the Association to Unite the Democracies (AUD), which lobbies to turn the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) into a political union of the U.S. and Europe, and Alex Newman, senior editor of The New American, part of the The John Birch Society. 
The role of the CIA and its predecessor, the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), is also indisputable at this point. "All along, the CIA-run front group was funding the so-called European Movement,” as revealed by declassified government documents. 
Europe was to be unified under a single regime, with the goal of a transatlantic union that would merge the United States with the European superstate. The same agenda resurfaced during the Obama administration in 2013 as the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership.
Despite Donald Trump supposedly torpedoing TTIP and the EU suffering Brexit, Britain continues to position itself as an Atlantic way station for the U.S. in a rebranded Trans-Pacific Partnership, adopting the governing “rules” on UK trade. This gives EU policy priority over supposed national policy on agriculture, fisheries, trade and the environment.
Britain has become an Atlantic way station in defence, too. Not only did it in 2020 enter the European Defence Union but in 2021 created AUKUS (or AUS-UK-US) to defend “our shared interests.”
This underscores how the globalist policy advances across several fronts. There is no single vehicle but several, like a veritable assault from all directions including tanks, submarines and aircraft.
A key piece of the puzzle was the Clinton arm of the Rockefeller enterprise (and possibly family) which made essential changes to international law: NAFTA, WTO, the repeal of Glass–Steagall Act and the Telecommunications Act.
The presidency of Bill Clinton was a tipping point when the balance of corporate and individual power tilted irreversibly. It is simply too important to ignore, yet many journalists do. The pretend they are liberal partisans but really it's a cover for the raw financial interest of the companies that pay them.
The Telecommunications Act of 1996 removed the obstacles to media consolidation. It was one of a series of measures under Bill Clinton that should make the non-partisan journalist pause: consider the deregulation of banking as well of media, NAFTA that stripped the protections that kept factories within national borders, and the three-strikes legislation that massively expanded for-profit prisons.
See Moneycircus, Jun 2021 — Journalists! What is to be Done?: The author takes a scalpel to the trade he joined three decades ago
The peace makers
The first attempt at a worldwide intergovernmental organisation, the League of Nations, failed to gain traction after the first world war because the U.S. Congress failed to ratify it. The schoolbook story is that the U.S. retreated into isolationism. A bigger blot on its paper is that it folded in 1946 because it had failed to stop WW2.
Hold up. The United Nations was formed in Oct, 1945. The League of Nations ceases, Apr 1946. Someone was keen to ensure they didn’t miss a beat, or the two projects had different aims. I suggest the aims were different. I cannot say for sure how the League differed except that it was not the first attempt at an international body of arbitration and peace.
In 1899 Tsar Nicholas II organized an international peace conference, concerned as he was by the arms race unleashed by industrial mass production.
The last Tsar foresaw the impending WW1 and attempted to stop it. During the First Hague Peace Conference, 26 countries came together to speak about disarmament and about the possibility of international jurisdiction, which led to the establishment of the Permanent Court of Arbitration in the Hague. That body is now known, colloquially as the World Court and is a sub-unit of the United Nations.
The Peace Palace has since 1913 been managed by the Carnegie Foundation — the same foundation whose trustees, in 1908 debated: “Is there any means known more effective than war, assuming you wish to alter the life of an entire people?”
“And they conclude that, no more effective means to that end is known to humanity, than war,” wrote Norman Dodd, Chief Investigator in 1953 for the Reece Committee. “So then, in 1909, they raise the second question, and discuss it, namely, how do we involve the United States in a war?”
It would seem that an attempt to prevent WW1 was hijacked by U.S. tax-evading foundations with the aid of the Dutch Royal Family who were, and are, key players in the oil industry through their stake in Royal Dutch Shell and would later found the Bilderberg Group.
“The Carnegie Foundation is working towards a better world,” it declares on the Peace Palace website. You are free to snigger.
The one ruler who may have tried to stop WW1 was then removed and his family liquidated. His country was annexed for an experiment in social engineering. Then his plan for a world tribunal was repurposed first as the League and then the United Nations. [See note below about Kaiser Wilhelm’s effort to prevent WW1.]
One common thread that you may notice is that the globalists are not imaginative. They repeatedly hijack and redirect the efforts of others, from the World Court to Greenpeace.
The money makers
While corporations have grown stronger, to the point where they are richer and more powerful than many nations, it is a paradox that bureaucracies have also strengthened. This, I suspect, is the key to understanding Event Covid.
The United Nations Sustainable Cities Programme, United Smart Cities, and the Resilient Communities & Cities Partnership Program are examples (and that’s not all) of the proposal to reassign power at the regional level. How can nations dissolve and yet the functionaries and administrators, beadles and bureaucrats, regulators and rule makers retain their power?
Meanwhile nation states are being suppressed. Powers have, nominally, been delegated to regional assemblies. National legislatures have been sidelined, the media has become a Megaphone, speaking with one voice. People have been locked down and their input, even their labour, seems not to be required any longer. Central banks can suddenly find all the money they need to finance bureaucratic projects — NHS Track and Trace cost £37bn over two years ($50bn) and has failed catastrophically.
MPs chuckle and guffaw as a colleague, Sir David Amess, is assassinated. He was due to speak that the renewal of the Coronavirus Act that give the government emergency powers. His surviving colleagues waved it through without a vote.
Many social services have been suspended or curtailed, censorship and surveillance have increased, and regional government has been centralised.
The UK for example has four enabling acts in addition to the Coronavirus Act:
Covert Human Intelligence (criminal conduct) Act passed 2020, allowing officials to break the law up to and including murder.
Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill, banning protests, currently in House of Lords.
Online Safety Bill to censor and shadow ban content, currently in committee stage.
Reform of the Official Secrets Acts to, in the words of the Home Secretary, “empower the whole national security community to counter the insidious threat we face today.”
How to reconcile the neutering of nations with the massive growth of bureaucracy? The answer must be, it seems to me, that the bureaucracy does not answer to the nation but to a corporate syndicate. There is some reason to believe this because corporations, through tax-evading foundations, greatly influence the bureaucracy and even write policy.
The pandemic has seen non-profit organization and charities take a leading role in forming policy which often seems to bypass the traditional channels of government, routing straight to the ministerial level.
New World Order
We face a renewal of the New World Order (H.G. Wells, ©1939) which in his ideal vision blended communism with fascism.
We see corporations, that for half a century told us they were fighting for capitalism, for free trade and the West — and who persecuted leftists and trades unionists mercilessly — now adopt Woke ideology and praise China’s version of communism or oligarchical collectivism. 
Was the Cold War a lie?
Roughly coinciding with the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the Western nations decided they no longer wanted to maintain the welfare state, the post war pension system or the manufacturing, industrial base that supported Western lifestyles. They launched the first of several "tariff and trade agreements" starting with NAFTA and GATT, which dismantled the industrial network that made it profitable to manufacture goods in places like the U.S. and Britain.
See Moneycircus, Oct 2021 — Marx's Monumental Error: Titan's shortcomings can help to see The Great Reset more clearly
There are illuminating parallels in the war on Germany. Supposedly smashed after WW2, it was actually integrated into the United States: chemicals, oil, aerospace, pharmaceuticals, medicine, education, psychology, neuroscience, political science, bureaucrats and spies, policing and military. Objectively one could says that without Germany the American dream would have fallen short.
Much of the U.S. post-war miracle was a refinement or a tweak on technologies that had been exported to and refined in Germany then brought home. The USSR did the same, with less technical accomplishment.
The next article will go on to explore these technologies and the investors.
UPDATE: Oct 29, 2021
A reader notes (thanks Edwige): “There’s at least as good a case that Kaiser Wilhelm tried to stop WW1. He wanted Germany to mobilise only in the East only to be told by Von Moltke this was impossible. Von Moltke changed the mobilisation plans in the West anyway to ensure they would fail (they probably would have failed anyway but oligarchs didn’t get where they are today by taking chances).”
The telegrams between the Tsar and Kaiser that followed the probable false-flag murder of Archduke Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo are recorded. 
 William Bruneau, 2013 — Hugh Trevor-Roper: The Wartime Journals
 Julian Jackson, 2003 — France: The Dark Years, 1940-1944
 Christian Gomez, New American, 2015 — A Review of “World Federalism 101”
 Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, Daily Telegraph, 2001 — Euro-federalists financed by US spy chiefs
 Charles Crawford, 2009 — HG Wells, Liberal Fascist, Enlightened Nazi
 Facing History Org — A Last-Ditch Effort to Prevent a War
Excellent. Adam Smith (interested parties coming together to form a cartel) and James Burnham (The Managerial Revolution) come to mind. This is interesting: https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2021/09/17/the-great-reset-how-managerial-revolution-was-plotted-80-years-ago-by-cia-neocon/
"How to reconcile the neutering of nations with the massive growth of bureaucracy? The answer must be, it seems to me, that the bureaucracy does not answer to the nation but to a corporate syndicate."
There is also the strong element that the bureaucracy serves as a both a shop window/training ground for future players in the corporate world. And also the revolving door for existing corporate players at the top of bureaucratic pyramid.