Book Review – Bilderberg Fictions

You may also like...

2 Responses

  1. Futureshock says:

    Hi Will,

    Thanks for you good and solid documented article, as always. Although I highly enjoy and recommend the video clips of Mark Dice in the streets talking to automatons who once were people, he unfortunately is one of those researchers who have a way too low standard for sourcing their books and articles. Often the core of their story is true, but this gets clouded by the outer rings of unsubstantiated claims or sometimes even utter misinformation. This makes more intellectual people, who we really need more of in the movement, quickly dismiss the whole thing. We also got fed the meme of “shills” which I don’t really fall for either. Although some researchers make so many mistakes it becomes suspicious, I think it most of the time it is incompetence before dishonesty. Therefore I like your refutations of some of the more well-known researchers, because they are no vile hit-pieces, but solid essays aiming to encourage better scholarship. We need it, and we need it quickly.

    I agree that the importance of the Bilderberg Group is highly overstated. I have the hardcopy version of both the authorized and the unauthorized biographies of Prince Bernhard, which already tell much one needs to know about it. I’m from the Netherlands myself, so I have both versions in Dutch. The English translation exists, but I unfortunately can’t find it digitally. The English quotes that follow are therefore my own translations. I haven’t read this particular book by Dice, but I don’t think this biography is among his source material. Correct me if I’m wrong.

    The authorized version [1962] is written by Alden Hatch and with approval of the Prince himself. Much of the text consists of interviews, discussions and direct quotes made by Bernhard. A full chapter is about the Bilderberg Conferences, so no very big secret there. Also Unilever-president Paul Rijkens is quoted multiple times. He was also one of the founding members. This book is where the Bernhard-quote on that it would be difficult to persuade the people of Europe to give up national sovereignty for a supra-national body originates from. We can read that the biggest ideal of the Prince was to create a “United States of Europe”. It also says that Bernhard envisioned a time where the borders between Europe and the US would be nothing more than a formality, something of which the TPP is of course a steppingstone. It also described the need and strive for a common currency, but not before a complete political union was forged. On the contrary of what is claimed widely, for instance on Sourcewatch, this biography doesn’t say that the aim of Bilderberg is “world government”. Maybe the English translation says it, but the original Dutch not.

    But there are other interesting points made:

    – The “non-attributable results” which flow from the Conferences are “much more important” than the ones that are attributable.
    – Paul Rijkens said candidly that during the private conversations at dinner and in private quarters always “much more important things” happen than during the official presentations which end up in the minutes and lists of talking points. The way it’s written, “things”, insinuates that he meant more than only talking. I’m curious how this is translated in the English version! Rijkens also said that “through the years we’ve created some kind of brotherhood which is based on friendship and mutual trust”.

    This alone tells us that the meetings are more like a cover for what really goes on, and that the really important information exchanged is protected by a Masonic-like system of what they in the book call “Bilderberg-alumni”. So by keeping the official program irrelevant they easily have been able to switch the narrative from the Conferences itself to the tin-foilers outside the gates. The only thing they have to link to prove its innocence is the official program and/or minutes of the meetings. But that’s not what it really is about, we can be sure of that.

    The unauthorized biography is of course a bit more candid, but also full of wild speculations. The author Wim Klinkenberg was member of the Dutch Communist party at the time, which of course says a lot. But it also contains some interesting facts and information leads.

    – One Bedell Smith from the CIA was one of the key people in the establishment of the Conferences. Philip Agee claimed in a 1976 presentation held in The Netherlands that the Bilderberg Conferences were set up and organized with CIA money.
    – Visits by the Prince to the house of Edmond de Rothschild.
    – The Prince was asked a question by one of the weekly magazines out here that if he only had time left for one function, one chairmanship, what would he choose? The Prince said that the chairmanship of Bilderberg was the most important one in his life. It insinuates that he thought of it as even being more important than his function as being Prince of The Netherlands, and certainly more important as his chairmanship of the World Wildlife Fund. This would make it of course very clear that the meetings are something more than just casual gatherings where nothing relevant happens.


    The 1978 book Vodka-Cola by journalist Charles Levinson is also quite informative about all major NGO’s that were present in de Cold War era. The Bilderberg Club and the Trilateral Commission are of course among them. This book hovers somewhere between journalistic and scholarly and gives quite some interesting little factoids about the hidden influence of the ‘parallel government’. Foreign Affairs did a small review of the book, so it was read in that circles too. Of course the review was quite negative: Here some quotes on the Bilderbergers, which name is spelled wrong consistently:

    “Bernhardt has never hidden the fact that the aim of the Bildeberg, where the Western elites coordinate their thoughts and attitudes, is to create a “world government.” This age-old ambition has been frequently expressed by David Rockefeller, a leading Bildeberger and original financial angel of the heavenly venture.”
    “Clearly we are not implying that some extravagant plot is being hatched in shadowy secrecy by a handful of ambitious and powerful individuals. Otherwise we should have to assume that the empire bosses kept James Bond as their bedside reading. No, the truth is more subtle but no less disturbing in its possible implications. Every day the nation state loses a little more of its power and its substance. In the face of this decline, which partly explains the current crisis, the Overworld sees itself as the only force still capable of producing results. The capitalists’ profession and the workings of management produce specific mentalities, attitudes and values.“
    “Today the leaders on both sides confront each other with the same worries, and the same tendency to dismiss ideology as part of the simple fare better reserved for those inhabiting the vast swamps of public opinion. At the present time, however, the non-governmental power base accepts that highly centralized control can only be maintained if integration is structured and bureaucratized. The ideology developed and the terms of reference transmitted will have to be strong to resist the frictions and variations so often present in our pitiable democracies. There must therefore be an institutionalized world government in which traditional values can be more effectively controlled and directed. The proliferation of councils and committees obviously results from the elite’s desire to remain in control of operations by influencing attitudes through propaganda.” [p. 185-187]

    This guy certainly didn’t had the full picture then, but I think he was quite right on how the NWO plan on forced globalization was and is rationalized by the lower elites and the aids and delivery-men of the higher elites. He doesn’t provide a source of Bernhard saying or writing about his aim for World Government unfortunately. But they must exist, if we’re to believe Mr. Levinson.


    I myself am just in the process of starting up my own website where I publish my essays on subjects surrounding the NWO. The layout and visuals of the website have to be improved quite a lot and I only have a few articles published yet, but I would appreciate it very much if you would take some time to read what’s already there and send me a short e-mail on what you think about it and maybe some tips or constructive critique.


  2. Will B says:

    Thanks for the kind words and helpful comments. I like to think that my aim is to add some academic rigor to the consideration of these issues, and to test some of the anti-N.W.O. claims being made, a process that sometimes involves treating seriously some rather odd and extreme allegations. At the moment I have a piece in development that examines in detail a very specific and oft-related claim about the power of the Bilderberg Group. It is not intended nor is it constructed as a personal attack on the main researcher responsible for making the claim. As I will show (once it is posted in a couple of weeks) the researcher in question has made a number of claims that do not withstand close scrutiny and appears to,have let his preconceived ideas shape his interpretation of the evidence. Bias confirmation is what it is called. It happens a lot in anti-N.W.O. work which leads to the odd situation of people being right or nearly right, but for the wrong reasons.

    You commentary about about Bilderberg is quite apt. An interesting aspect I think is that both the Bernhard and Retinger biographies came out respectively in the 1960s and 1970s with whole chapters devoted to Bilderberg, which seems inconsistent with the idea that there was an effort to suppress the fact it even happened. Bit I will have to check to see how the English translation of Hatch expresses Rykens quotes (and don’t forget that Rykens employed David Mitrany).

    I think Bilderberg is important, but how it actually functions is complex. On the one hand I think the formal program has a purpose in shaping and influencing elite debates and forming a consensus about certain issues. That can be tracked to some degree, though even with access to meeting minutes it is difficult. On the other the informal aspect, the corridor talk or,patio chats (evident at Copengphagen as Charlie Skelton was astute enough to pick up on) , and the networking, is more enduring but somewhat harder to track. It it is also quite fascinating as well of some concern to those who believe democracy should practiced rather than preached.

    I will look at you website.

    Regards Will

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *