The Basics of Supranational Politics: NGOs, Superclass Index, Four-Establishment Model and Box Models

"[Congressman] Jan de Wit aksed me to answer your question. [Our party] is focused on formal political relations … With your question we enter the extra-parliamentary domain of parapolitics; informal, non-public organizations in which influence-forming is practiced, often by persons in influential government positions and/or from the corporate world who together make political decisions without oversight. ...

"Too little concrete information is available about [Le Cercle and hundreds of] other organizations besides Bilderberg to be used in parliamentary sessions. ... As far as I know, the topic [of Bilderberg] has never been discussed in the past 8.5 years [that I've been here in congress]."

"[Katharine Graham] of the permanent establishment never lost sight of the fact that societies thrive not by the victories of their factions but by their ultimate reconciliations."

"One-third of modern history is still classified* ... [An] intelligence officer turned art teacher ... displayed a color slide of an abstract sculpture. The piece was over six feet tall, of metal branches all intertwined... It was, to all appearances, a random column of ugliness. Hardly the model for a book. "Don't look at the sculpture itself," our friend advised. "Look at the holes." Inside the twisted sculpture was an orderly pattern of smooth ovals, arranged in perfect balance, making sense of the whole...

"Known history is like the visible surface of the sculpture, a series of harsh, twisted, seemingly unconnected branches. The hidden parts of history, the covert sides, are more orderly and rational, but can be seen and understood only if you are told where to look. The holes in history are what makes sense of the thing; the hidden motives, secret agendas, classified purposes... "

There are different ways to look at the world when it comes to politics. In western countries we tend to look at the various political parties, the elected heads of state, the ministers and their interactions with parliament and the public. We shouldn't forget the role of the media, which actually serves a purpose besides entertainment: its most important function is to act as a fourth pillar to the Trias Politica, a reference to the separation of the legislative, executive, and judicial branches in many western governments. The media's primary role are to help act as a guardian to the democratic process. If the government has been corrupted, or outside forces try to influence the democratic process in any unfair way, the idea is that there are always untainted media outlets that can investigate and inform the public about it.

After the internal political makeup of a country has been analyzed, including the fact whether or not it has a free media and fair elections, it is generally time to look at the country's external relations. Every country on the planet maintains political, economic and/or military relationships with other countries. These relations can be good, bad or anything in between. Over the course of the 20th century, and especially since the end of World War II, these one-on-one or small-circle relations have increasingly been replaced by international institutes where many countries are represented at the same time. Well known examples of these international institutes include the United Nations, the European Union, NATO and the G8 meetings. Specifically on the economic front there are the World Bank, the IMF, the OECD and the World Trade Organization. Through all these organizations countries in the West and around the world try to work out their political, military and economic issues.

However, sometimes events happen in Western countries that cannot be explained by this standard model. Senior officials of the BCCI bank and police investigators being intimidated by a CIA-Mossad-related "black network", Belgian officials gathering information on a similar "nebula", or Daniel Casolaro committing suicide while investigating another similar "Octopus" fall into that category. Basically, the hundreds of unusual deaths this author has come across over the years can be considered a mystery, because not one of them has ever been proved to be government related - even though that's often where all the evidence is pointing to. My own experiences related to intimidation can be considered outside of the standard political model, because my research was essentially focused on non-government organizations. Then there are cases as:

Anybody who has spent at least a few hundred hours looking into these events can see that there is an overwhelming amount of evidence that not all is exactly as the media or our school books are portraying these events to be - however hard it may be for the average person to put in the necessary study hours and to accept the somewhat paradigm-shattering conclusions and social awkwardness associated with these topics. The fact is that influential establishments really do appear to exist and that they are able to organize and get away with conspiracies like the ones above. Unfortunately, no (intellectual or complete) political model exists to explain these events. We'll be introducing such a model in this article.

In addition, what also no one has come up with is a good explanation as to why both the mainstream, alternative and conspiracy media continue to distort the truth to such extremes. Yes, with the mainstream media a basic explanation would involve financial interests and ties to the government and superclass. We actually also see these ties in much of the so-called anti-establishment "new left" "liberal CIA" network, with plenty of evidence existing that the conspiracy media most certainly is controlled by the security services.

Still, what remains quite unexplained to me is that rational conspiracy theory as discussed by ISGP basically is never discussed in any of the small-time publications around the world. It certainly seems to show that people are very easily intimidated and just don't dare to research, do, or speak out about anything that falls outside the norm. That is, when it results in them having to give up everything all at once: money, career, status, women, comfort, possibly health, and that combined with being the subject of endless ridicule or the same old cliche jokes. Even with this though, it remains hard to explain this level of control over truly independent information with only an establishment model. Still, such a model does get us very far, much further than any classic non-establishment model.

As for this new political model that we need, it turns out that over the course of the 20th century, and especially after World War II, a massive amount of private think tanks and social clubs have been set up, much of it financed by a rather small group of banks, multinationals and foundations - and sometimes aided by membership fees and limited government subsidies.

This website has spent over ten years crawling through these networks, in the process gathering and categorizing the names of over 2,000 private groups and "independent" government advisory boards. Some of these groups are focused on economic integration; others more on sustainable development, domestic policy, foreign policy, diplomatic relations or national security. And what they have in common is that no one has learned about them in school. While in the early 21st century an increasing amount of studies are being conducted on these groups - largely in response to the overwhelming amount of conspiracy literature available, not the least of it ISGP - conclusions reached in these studies still haven't made it into national school books or even in a proper, unbiased matter to the mass media. And thus the supranational model of politics hasn't yet seeped into the public consciousness.

There's always the question how much influence the men running this private network (a small group dominates) have, because, frankly, there's almost no testimony from senior government officials to what extent they listen and implement the advice of these men. All of a sudden grown men start giggling like little girls, shrugging off all relevant questions. Bilderberg truly is a great example. The group is closely linked to the Netherlands, because of the role of the Dutch royal family in it. Despite the fact that the group once every few years made the news, before the age of the internet, few Dutch people had really ever heard about it, even though the group has met annually since 1952. Here's what a foreign policy expert of a long-serving member of Dutch parliament explained about Bilderberg to ISGP:

At one point van Bommel brought up a few basic questions involving Bilderberg, the only result being that these questions were laughed off by the state secretary for European affairs, Frans Timmermans, a visitor of Bilderberg meetings. Isn't that amazing? What's wrong with questions about what has been discussed at these meetings? Apparently there in an unwritten rule in Dutch parliament to not discuss these groups.

Judging by U.S. congressional records, the Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission have never been part of the daily discourse either. Why not? Of course, there's only one obvious answer which everyone already knows: influence is coming from these groups. There actually are very, very few instances in which this influence has been clearly documented, simply because the media and politicians - like Frans Timmermans above - not only refuse to address the issue, they prefer to make the masses feel uncomfortable asking these questions in the first place by ridiculing anyone who does.

Still, occasionally we find examples of the influence of these groups. In one instance the influence of the European Round Table (ERT), a group with very close links to Bilderberg, was described. On June 23, 2003, the Belgian Jan Puype, the only independent journalist who appears to have attended a meeting of the ERT, at least until that point, wrote about one of the council's meetings that year which was attended by Romano Prodi, a prime minister of Italy from 1996 to 1998 and again from 2006 to 2008. At the time he visited the ERT, Prodi was president of the European Commission, a position he held from 1999 to 2004. It appears Prodi was groomed by the liberal establishment: as a political science professor at the University of Bologna, he had been a member of the Bilderberg steering committee in the 1981-1982 period. According to Puype, by 2003 Prodi was still influenced by these business elites:

*****

Note: On August 8, 2023 the intro article was cut off here in preparation for a much more updated version. The sections on ISGP's three establishment model and its boxes model has been separated and expanded. So is the section discussing all the elite ties of all past U.S. presidential administrations.

Notes

1. Feb. 16, 2005, #7, Solidair, interview with Jan Puype. [link]