"Soros remains primarily committed to destroying
the remaining bastions of the family, sovereign nationhood, and Christian
Faith east of the Trieste-Stettin line. He senses that his full-throttle
intervention in America is not necessary, because things are gradually
going his way anyway."
by Srdja Trifkovic (www.ChroniclesMagazine.org )
Aug. 31, 2004
NGO's, Behold Your God.
Soros was born in Budapest in 1930 but, today, spends most of his time in
New York City. Not much is known about his early years. He is the only eminent
"holocaust survivor" who has been accused of collaboration with
the Nazis. In 1947, he managed to sneak through the Iron Curtain, and, the
official story goes, "he landed penniless in London, but by hard work
and sheer genius, he rose to become one of the planet's most successful
investors and richest men."
Mr. Soros' peculiar moral values, political views, and ideological preferences
would be immaterial without the money that he can spend promoting and imposing
them. The bulk of that money-currently estimated at not less than seven
billion dollars-was earned in the minus-sum game of currency and stock speculation,
contributing nothing to the creation of wealth and making millions of ordinary
people poorer in the process. His offshore Quantum Fund-legally headquartered
in Curacao, beyond U.S.-government supervision-specializes in speculative
investments to take advantage of deliberately induced political and economic
weaknesses of different countries and regions. In an interview with the
Swiss weekly L'hebdo (May 1993), Soros outlined his strategy: "I
speculate on discrepancy between the reality and the public image of this
reality, until a correctional mechanism occurs, which approaches these two."
His profits are staggering. On September 16, 1992, he famously made a billion
dollars in one day by betting against the Bank of England and the pound
sterling. In July 1997, he contributed to the Southeast Asian financial
crisis by shorting the Thai baht. In early 2000, he supposedly suffered
losses on tech stocks, but some analysts now suggest that the burn of the
NASDAQ was controlled and that Soros helped to start the fire. By last November,
he was betting the U.S. dollar would plummet. As the London Independent
reported (November 28, 2003), his activities were contributing to a growing
belief on Wall Street that the dollar would slide even further.
There is nothing new in Soros' approach to making money or in the ability
of such a person to make an impact, invariably detrimental, on his host
society's morals and culture. What is new with Mr. Soros-in addition to
the implausible claim that a private speculator could get as far as he has
unaided by any established financial interests-is his systematic, concerted
effort to use a large part of his fortune to promote his peculiar social
and political views. He does so through a global network of "nongovernmental
organizations" named after himself and active primarily in Eastern
Europe but also in Africa, Latin America, and the United States. At age
75, money is not his object but his tool. He has used it to develop a well-coordinated
global operation centered on the Open Society Institute
(OSI) in New York, which funds a network of subsidiaries in over 50 countries.
Even before the Open Society network came into being, Soros' blueprint for
postcommunist "shock therapy" reform had been put to the test.
First came Poland, where the first postcommunist prime minister, Tadeusz
Mazowiecki, was close to Soros and subsequently remained associated with
his local subsidiary, the Stefan Batory Foundation. In
his book Underwriting Democracy, Soros says that he personally
prepared the broad outlines of Poland's comprehensive economic reform:
"I joined forces with Professor Jeffrey Sachs of Harvard
University, who was advocating a similar program, and sponsored his work
in Poland through the Stefan Batory Foundation . . . The IMF approved and
the program went into effect on Jan. 1, 1990. It was very tough on the population,
but people were willing to take a lot of pain in order to see real change."
was only a start, however; far more important to his goals was his association
in 1991-92 with Russia's "reformist" leaders Anatoly Chubais and
Yegor Gaidar and their Harvard guru Sachs. Within a year of their "shock
therapy," hyperinflation had wiped out Russians' savings and the long-suffering
middle class with it. Pensioners were literally starving. The parallel "privatization"
of Russia's huge resources-timber, oil, gas, chemicals, media-created the
robber oligarchs and contributed to Russia's effective deindustrialization.
The country was lowered into neocolonial dependence: a supplier of energy
and raw materials and an importer of high technology and manufactured goods.
Nevertheless, in early 1993, Soros felt that Russia had not gone far enough:
"The social safety net would also provide a powerful incentive to shut
down loss-making enterprises. Factories could be idled and the raw materials
and energy that go into production could be sold for more than the output."
George Soros is out to deconstruct nations and states as Europe has known
them for centuries, with Russia always the main prize. In an interview with
the Moscow daily Komersant (August 8, 1997), he declared that "a strong
central government in Russia cannot be democratic." "The rescue
of a free Russian economy depends on the attraction of Western investments,"
he added, and, to that end, "Russia's general public must accept the
ideology of an open society."
By that time, a total of 29 "Soros Foundations" were active in
every postcommunist country. In 1994, his foundations spent a total of $300
million; by 1998, that figure had risen to $574 million. These are enormous
sums in an impoverished and vulnerable Eastern Europe.
Those foundations say that they are "dedicated to building and maintaining
the infrastructure and institutions of an open society." What this
means in practice is clear from their many fruits. Regarding "women's
health" programs in Central and Southeastern Europe, for instance,
one will look in vain for breast-cancer detection or prenatal or postnatal
care. Soros' main goal is clear and frankly stated: "to improve the
quality of abortion services." Accordingly, his Public Health Program
has supported the introduction of medical abortion in Albania, Latvia, Lithuania,
and Slovakia and the introduction of manual vacuum aspiration (MVA) abortion
in Macedonia, Moldova, and Russia. In addition,
"OSI has also worked with international and local
NGOs to respond to the growing strength of the antiabortion movement.
Through its influence on ministries of health and hospital administrators,
that movement has made strides in reducing access to abortion . . . OSI
will continue to support training in quality of care and efforts to keep
abortion legal, safe, and accessible for all women in the region."
Why is Soros so interested in promoting more abortions in
Eastern Europe? Overpopulation cannot be the reason: The region is experiencing
a colossal demographic collapse and has some of the lowest fertility rates
in the world. Unavailability of abortion cannot be the answer either: According
to a recent U.N. report, five European countries had more abortions than
live births in 2000-the Russian Federation, Bulgaria, Belarus, Rumania,
and Ukraine. Overall, the report said, abortion rates are "substantially
higher in central and eastern Europe and the CIS countries than in western
Europe and North America." The only logical answer is that Soros wants
as few Russians and others born into this world as possible.
Soros' public-health programs also "support initiatives focusing on
the specific health needs of several marginalized communities" and
promote "harm reduction": "Its primary goal is to empower
drug users to protect their health. Needle/syringe exchange and substitution
therapies (e.g., methadone) are at the center of harm reduction health interventions."
His "harm reducers" have expanded their work with special initiatives
on "sex workers" and prisoners and launched a policy initiative
that attempts to ensure that "repressive drug policies do not impede
the expansion of harm reduction efforts."
Over the past five years, the Soros network has given a successful start
to previously nonexistent "gay" activism in almost all of its
areas of operation. The campaign for "LGBT [lesbian, gay, bisexual,
transgender] Rights" is directed from Budapest, where Miriam Molnar's
1999 policy paper published by OSI defined the "problem" as discrimination
and the low level of acceptance, visibility, and political representation
of LGBT's. It was necessary either "to convince the society to accept
LGBT people as equal and let the society make pressure [sic] to the politicians
(through media) to change laws" or "to convince the politicians
that LGBT people are equal and that they need help in convincing the rest
of the society." The overall goals were to generate discussion about
LGBT identity within the community, to make them visible and "create
a positive image," and to establish regular forums of discussion with
other groups in the region. Specific tasks included the development of websites
in English with subsites in local languages, the establishment of task forces
that would react to all "homophobic" media outbursts in one "Pink
Book," and the organization of two-week summer schools for teachers
that would "provide training about discrimination of [sic] LGBT people,
disabled people, overweight people etc."
In November 1999, a pilot project began at the Center for Publishing Development
(OSI Budapest) on homosexual books in Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Hungary,
Slovenia, and Slovakia. That same year, Nash Mir (Our World) Gay
and Lesbian Center announced that it had been registered as an
NGO in the Ukraine. From that moment, the group was free to pursue its stated
goals, including "fight against sexual-orientation discrimination"
and "homophobic sentiments in societal consciousness" and "assistance
to upbringing of gays' and lesbians' self-consciousness as equal and valuable
members of society." The group expressed gratitude for its legalization
to the "Ukrainian branch of Soros Foundation Network (Renaissance Foundation)
which lobbied our question in the Ministry of Justice and render [sic] legal
assistance to us."
Gay.ru is a Soros-funded Moscow NGO that has developed "into an established
and recognized Russian gay and lesbian center" and "the clearing
house for lesbian and gay groups scattered across the country":
"We keep contacts with all existing gay, lesbian,
and AIDS organizations in Russia and maintain on-going correspondence
and reporting to international gay and lesbian organizations . . . We
have collected the biggest off-line library that features over a hundred
Russian titles and some fifty English classic books on gay studies. It
was greatly enhanced by the Core Collection on Gay and Lesbian Issues
awarded to us by the Soros Foundation in 2000."
In Bucharest, Monika Barcsy of the local Soros branch bewailed
the fact that, in Rumania, "the homosexual identity is stigmatized"
and is one of the main bases for treating individuals as "the others"
in an attitude of intolerance. Their families became the victims of prejudice
"just because the society is unable to accept the legitimacy of same-sex
relations as a 'normal' manifestation." The author singles out the
Rumanian Orthodox Church as a prime culprit: "The problem is that many
Christian Orthodox students' organizations and other student groups support
the church." In 1994, she points out, more than 100 theology students
began a series of demonstrations in front of Rumania's parliament against
homosexual propaganda in the media and collected signatures demanding legislation
to criminalize same-sex relations. Barcsy concludes by reiterating the standard
"Gay men and lesbians need rights that guarantee
them the expression of their identity in the public sphere . . . [T]he
legal status of gays and lesbians, their ability to move and appear in
public, to speak out and act together should be considered a very good
test of the civic openness. [It] can't be resolved with the new laws made
under the pressure of different human rights organizations. Romania needs
. . . to ameliorate the negative responses towards the homosexuals from
the majority population . . . There are "problems" with the
society as a whole, and the society's mentality can't be changed overnight."
A key pillar of Soros' activities is his dictum that "no-one
has a monopoly on the truth" and that "civic education" should
replace the old "authoritarian" model. Civic education does not
have to be "just a dialogue" between a teacher and students, he
says; in addition, "we have projects like health education, where people
use new ways to discuss issues like hygiene, diet, and sex." While
"this does not sound like traditional civic education," he continues,
it is "a new way for teachers to relate to their pupils," just
as citizens must relate in new ways to governments and elected officials
in societies trying to become more open and democratic.
Accordingly, throughout postcommunist Eastern Europe, the Soros Foundation's
primary stated goal is to "democratize the education system" by
"instituting curriculum reforms." What this means in practice
has been demonstrated over the past three years by Serbia's education minister
Gaso Knezevic, a friend and confidante of Soros. Since
the first day of his tenure, Mr. Knezevic has insisted that schools must
be transformed from "authoritarian" institutions into "exercise
grounds" for the "unhindered expression of students' personalities
in the process of equal-footed interaction with the teaching staff, thus
vercoming the obsolete concept of authority and discipline rooted in the
oppressive legacy of patriarchal past." Mr. Knezevic started his reform
with primary schools, with a pilot program of "educational workshops"
for children ages 7 to 12. The accompanying manual, financed by the Open
Society, rejects the quaint notion that the purpose of education is the
"acquisition of knowledge" and insists that the teacher has to
become the class "designer" and that his relationship with students
should be based on "partnership."
In Russia, Soros' associates exercise great control over the selection of
textbooks for Russian schools. According to a press release by the Gaidar
Youth Library, financial support from the Open Society Institute provided
it with computers, videocassettes, and CD's, all of which made "special
training" for the children of "underprivileged people" possible
in the library:
"We organized a special seminar "Children's rights
nowadays" for all specialists who took part in our project . . .
The working group of the program "The Circle of Friends" is
grateful to the "Open Society" Institute (Soros Fund, Budapest)
for the opportunity to realize this project in a full volume."
In 1999, the Moscow Open Society office started a major five-year
project, "The Development of Education in Russia." Its goal is
to "reeducate rural teachers at a cost of US $100-150 million"
(Nezavisimaya Gazeta, September 19, 1998). It is also applying a program
called "Tolerance" in Russian secondary schools, but its masterminds
may have made a linguistic blunder. According to a Russian critic of the
The Russian translation of this Latin word-tyerpimost-has the dual meaning
of prostitution and could be confused with doma tyerpimosti, houses of ill
fame . How come this financial manipulator tries to teach us about tolerance,
us who grew up with Leo Tolstoy, one of the first philosophers of non-violence?
But Mr. Soros is also a horribly distorted mirror, which should make us
see our own, present image, without blinking or turning away. There are
times when evil can become an eye-opener, when its derisive laughter can
waken us up and help regaining our strength. We should not miss this opportunity.
A first step in that direction may have been taken last November 7, when
the OSI Moscow office was raided by a private security company hired by
the owner of the building with whom the foundation was engaged in a protracted
legal battle. Only weeks before, Mikhail Khodorkovsky, the billionaire oligarch
and OSI Moscow executive director who has his own NGO called the Open Russia
Foundation, was arrested and charged with tax evasion, theft, forgery, and
fraud. Soros denounced the arrest as an act of "persecution" that
should disqualify Russia from belonging to the G-8 group of industrialized
countries. "I believe that he acted within the constraints of the law.
I am doing the same in the United States," said Soros, alluding to
his multimillion-dollar donations toward "regime change" in Washington
next November. The American press indignantly reported that the raid was
directed against a philanthropic organization that had spent "more
than $US 1 billion on charitable projects in Russia in the past 15 years."
"Racism" is Soros' regular obsession, but he faced the potential
problem of finding it in racially nondiverse Eastern European countries.
This has been resolved by identifying a designated victim group-Gypsies!
"Few minority groups in Europe face as much social, economic, and political
discrimination as do Romani people," says OSI. Being a "Roma activist"
has become a lucrative designation within the community. Seventy of the
most promising ones came to the conference "Roma in Expanding Europe:
Challenges for the Future," held in Budapest last summer, at which
Soros inaugurated a "Decade of Roma Inclusion." The conference
offered policy recommendations, some of which could have been written by
Jesse Jackson: first, obligatory and free preschool education in desegregated
classrooms; second, Romani assistants in the classroom, especially in preschool;
third, antibias training for teachers and school administrators; and fourth,
integration of Romani history and culture in textbooks at all levels.
Legally mandated affirmative-action programs for Roma in high schools and
universities were recommended by the delegations of Rumania and Serbia-Montenegro.
On employment, the conference recommended tax incentives for those who employ
Roma and access to low-interest credit for small Roma-owned family businesses.
The Czech and Slovak delegations also proposed setting aside a percentage
of government contracts for Roma construction firms. In the area of housing,
specific demands were made to combat "racism and discrimination,"
including the "legalization" of shantytowns and "equal access"
to municipal housing. The conference concluded that combating racial discrimination
against Roma must be pursued through the adoption of comprehensive anti-discrimination
legislation complying with the requirements of the E.U. Race Equality Directive.
The Rumanian delegation demanded that the Bucharest government recognize
the Roma holocaust by issuing a public apology along with urgent adoption
of a reparations package. The European Union was asked to make sure that
Roma are broadly involved in the design, implementation, and evaluation
of all E.U. spending on Roma projects.
Soros' "programs" would have been deemed laughable or outrageous
in their target countries only a decade ago. No one is laughing today, however.
For thousands of young Eastern Europeans, to become a "Soroshite"
represents today what joining the Party represented to their parents: an
alluring opportunity to have a reasonably paid job, to belong to a privileged
elite, and, for many, to travel abroad. The chosen few go to Soros's own
Central European University in Budapest, where they are taught that affirming
a scientifically grounded truth is "totalitarian" and that the
sovereign nation-state is evil.
There is not one patriot (Russian, Croat, Latvian, Serb, Rumanian, Hungarian)
or one practicing Christian on Soros' payroll. In all postcommunist countries,
Soros relies on the sons and daughters of the old communist establishment,
who are less likely to be tainted by any atavistic attachments to their
native soil, culture, and traditions. The more successful among them-and
the most loyal-may spend years drifting from one "project" to
another, and some have been living that way for more than a decade. Soros
has revealed (in Underwriting Democracy) that his Open Society foundations
will help create an international web, at the heart of which will be the
computerized base of personal data that will enable Western multinationals
to find the local candidates they need.
These new janissaries, just like those of the Ottoman army of old, have
to prove their credentials by being more zealous than the master himself;
as the Balkan proverb has it, "a convert is worse than a Turk."
Nobody is more insanely vehement in his insults against the Serbian people
and their history, religion, art, and suffering than a dozen Serb-born columnists
who are on the payroll of Sonja Licht, Soros' Gauleiter
Hoi polloi are force-fed the daily fare of OSI agitprop by "the Soros
media"-the term now exists in over a dozen languages-from the Gazeta
Wyborcza in Warsaw to Danas (Today) in Serbia, the Monitor
in Montenegro, the Markiza TV channel in Bratislava, and Vreme
weekly and the B-92 electronic media conglomerate in Belgrade. They invariably
parrot Soros' views and ambitions, reflected by the agenda of the local
Soros foundation at home and, in world affairs, by the International
Crisis Group (ICG), largely financed by Soros and run by his appointees.
Soros' agenda in world affairs is clear from the fact that his appointees
include Gen. Wesley Clark, who commanded NATO forces in
the war against Serbia in 1999; Louise Arbour, the former
chief prosecutor of the Yugoslav war-crimes tribunal at The Hague; former
assistant secretary of state Morton Abramowitz, an enthusiastic
supporter of Bosnian Muslims and Albanians in the wars of Yugoslav succession;
and former national security advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski,
whose visceral Russophobia aided and abetted the rise of Osama bin Laden
and his jihadist cohorts.
As Gilles d'Aymery noted two years ago, Soros is not just the power behind
the Open Society Institute, the U.S. Institute of Peace,
the National Endowment for Democracy, Human Rights
Watch, Amnesty International, and the International
"[L]ike an immense Jules Verne octopus, [he] extends
his tentacles all over Eastern Europe, South-Eastern Europe, the Caucasus
as well as the republics of the former Soviet Union. With the help of
these various groups [it is possible] not only to shape but to create
the news, the agenda and public opinion to further aims which are, in
short, the control of the world, its natural resources and the furtherance
of the uniform ideal of a perfect world polity made in America."
That polity will not be "American" in any recognizable
sense if Soros has his way, however. Here, he supports increased government
spending and tax increases, drug legalization, euthanasia, open borders
and immigration, immigrant entitlements, feminism, free abortion on demand,
affirmative action, and "gay" rights. He opposes the death penalty
in any circumstance. One of the trustees of OSI is Lani
Guinier, the law professor whom Bill Clinton tried to nominate
as head of the civil-rights division of the Department of Justice but changed
his mind when she was found to favor minority veto power over legislation.
Its president is Aryeh Neier, who had for 12 years been
executive director of the Soros-funded Human Rights Watch and, before that,
national director of the American Civil Liberties Union
for eight years.
That he is anti-Bush is unremarkable, but Soros' statement last December
that the defeat of the President is "a matter of life and death"
was silly. His largesse to Bush's foes-although substantial-does not reflect
the stated urgency of the moment: $15 million for America Coming
Together; $3 million for John Podesta's new think tank;
and $2.5 million for MoveOn.org falls far short of a month's
cost of running his many foundations around the world.
Soros remains primarily committed to destroying the remaining bastions of
the family, sovereign nationhood, and Christian Faith east of the Trieste-Stettin
line. He senses that his full-throttle intervention in America is not necessary,
because things are gradually going his way anyway. No matter who is his
party's anointed candidate come next November, the real choice will be between
George and Gyorgy, and that is not much of a choice.
Chronicles' foreign-affairs editor Srdja Trifkovic is the
author of The Sword of the Prophet: Islam-History, Theology, Impact
on the World.
Forward Courtesy of Tim White <firstname.lastname@example.org>
All information posted on this web site is
the opinion of the author and is provided for educational purposes only.
It is not to be construed as medical advice. Only a licensed medical doctor
can legally offer medical advice in the United States. Consult the healer
of your choice for medical care and advice.