perfect picture of a modern "transnational elite"

[Nordic]

We talk a lot here about "transnational elites". Most of us, it seems, have realized that these are the people who really run things.

This is a portrait of one of them.

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2010/06/ ... ional.html

You really gotta click on the link to read it, because this guy is the master of hyperlinking. I'm c&p'ing it here just for reference.

Chairman of Goldman Sachs International Was - Until Last Year - Also Chairman of BP

Janine Wedel has written extensively on how the "shadow elite" rule the world and about the "flexians" - the movers and shakers of the shadow elite who glide across borders, and structure overlapping (and not fully revealed) roles in government, business, media, and think tanks to serve their own agendas.

Wedel says that flexians wear many hats both within and outside of government, and use their networks of contacts to influence policy - are warping our democracy and the rule of law.

Peter Sutherland is the quintessential flexian.

According to his September 2009 bio:

Peter Sutherland is chairman of BP plc (1997 - current). He is also chairman of Goldman Sachs International (1995 - current). He was appointed chairman of the London School of Economics in 2008.... Before these appointments, he was the founding director-general of the World Trade Organisation. He had previously served as director general of GATT since July 1993 [and was] chairman of the Board of Governors of the European Institute of Public Administration (Maastricht) 1991-1996.

Sutherland resigned as BP's chairman in 2009, but apparently still serves in various key capacities.

Sutherland is managing director - as well as chairman - of Goldman Sachs International (Goldman Sachs International is the very powerful subsidiary of the Goldman Sachs Group, of which Lloyd Blankfein is CEO). Sutherland is also an Advisory Director of the Goldman Sachs Group itself.

And he was is European Chairman for the Trilateral Commission.

He has, at various times, attended meetings of the Bilderberg group.

He is also one of the chief financial advisers to the Vatican.

As if that is not enough, Sutherland also serves in the following capacities (click on "Read Full Background"):

Mr. Sutherland served as an Attorney General of Ireland and also served as European Commissioner from 1985 to 1989 where he was responsible for competition policy.... He serves as the Chairman of British Petroleum, BP Amoco PLC and United Kingdom. From 1989 to 1993, he served as the Chairman of Allied Irish Bank. .... He serves as a Non-Executive Director of Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson. He serves as a Director of Goldman Sachs International. He has been Member of Supervisory Board at Allianz SE since January 2010 and serves as its Member of International Advisory Board .... Mr. Sutherland served as a Non Executive Director of BP Plc since July 1995. He serves as a Member of Foundation Board of World Economic Forum. He served as an Independent Non Executive Director of National Westminster Bank PLC since January 2001. He served as an Independent Non Executive Director of The Royal Bank Of Scotland Plc from January 2001 to February 6, 2009.... In addition, he serves on the board of Allianz, Koc Holding A.S. and is a member of the advisory board of Eli Lilly.... He served as a Director of LM Ericsson Telephone Co since 1996, Ericsson SPA since 1996 and Investor AB since 1995. He served as a Non Executive Director of Royal Bank of Scotland Group plc from January 2001 to February 6, 2009.

Sutherland is - literally - like Lloyd Blankfein and Tony Hayward rolled into one. But unlike Blankfein and Hayward, he has also held numerous powerful governmental and quasi-governmental positions.

I give this one three

[vanlose kid]

Janine Wedel is a regular cloumnist at huffpo. Here's a list of past blogs.

Shadow Elite: Neocons Blast Back, On Israel's Behalf
66 Comments | Posted June 10, 2010 | 08:03 AM (EST)

"[Neoconservatives] always continue to sort of lurk in the framework and look for opportunities to animate their crowd and bring in their fellow travelers.." - Steve Clemons, head of the American Strategy Program at the New America Foundation in The Nation, March 18, 2010


The chance...

Read Post
Shadow Elite: BP And Government's Titanic Failure -- Outsourcing Its Talent (And Power)
55 Comments | Posted June 3, 2010 | 07:44 AM (EST)

We can all rest easy. One of the experts in Washington this week to brainstorm solutions to the oil leak knows a thing or two about blockbuster disasters ..... Titanic director James Cameron. It sounds absurd, but actually it may be an inspired idea: Cameron is an expert at underwater...

Read Post
Shadow Elite: Wall Street Culture - They Still Don't Get It (Except Their Bonuses)
20 Comments | Posted May 27, 2010 | 07:23 AM (EST)

By Linda Keenan and Janine R. Wedel

Have the overpaid, tin-eared members of the financial elite been humbled in the past 2 years, or fearful of coming reform? Hardly. Here's a bit of an angry email floating around Wall Street this spring.

Go ahead and continue to take us down..What's...
Read Post
Shadow Elite: Derivatives, A Horror Story
289 Comments | Posted May 20, 2010 | 07:41 AM (EST)

Strange as it sounds, my experience mapping under-the-radar power in Communist Poland, as a social anthropologist, helped me identify a new breed of modern-day power broker here in the U.S. Unaccountable operators are increasingly shaping public policy to suit their own interests, a disturbing trend I examine in...

Read Post
Shadow Elite: Think BP's The Bad Guy? Think Bigger, Way Bigger
368 Comments | Posted May 13, 2010 | 07:50 AM (EST)

By Linda Keenan and Janine R. Wedel

Coast Guard Captain leading hearings Wednesday: "It's my understanding that [a blowout preventer is] designed to industry standard ... manufactured by the industry, installed by the industry, with no government witnessing or oversight of the construction or installation. Is that...

Read Post
Shadow Elite: Neocons, The Holocaust & Emergency Powers
247 Comments | Posted May 6, 2010 | 07:25 AM (EST)

After a break last week, the Shadow Elite column resumes its look at the rise of executive power, and the cost to democracy. Today, how the Holocaust shaped neoconservative belief in the need for constant vigilance. The aftermath of 9/11 offered a small group I call in my...

Read Post
Shadow Elite: Wall Street Profiteers - Capitalists or Communists?
79 Comments | Posted April 29, 2010 | 07:08 AM (EST)

By Linda Keenan & Janine R. Wedel

"Only by engaging in irregular practices can the manager run a successful enterprise."

Does this quote describe the unspoken operating principle for profiteers of Goldman Sachs, and the rest of the disgraced financial industry? It could. But actually the quote is from economist...

Read Post
Shadow Elite: Goldman Sachs - Fraud Is Not the Scandal
155 Comments | Posted April 22, 2010 | 08:14 AM (EST)

The last few "Shadow Elite" columns have examined the troubling expansion of executive powers in recent decades. The 2008 financial bailout delivered yet more unchecked authority to the executive branch. As Yale constitutional law expert Jack Balkin puts it, "the Treasury Secretary [took] over a sizable chunk of...

Read Post
Shadow Elite: Warrantless Wiretap Case & Obama: Abuse of Executive Power?
Posted April 8, 2010 | 07:15 AM (EST)

The next few "Shadow Elite" columns will focus on the troubling implications of a steady increase in executive power around the world. This week we'll trace the path over time of expanding executive power in the U.S., and look at whether President Obama's defense strategy in the warrantless...

Read Post
Shadow Elite: March to War -- The Neocon Playbook, Straight from the Soviet Bloc
Posted March 25, 2010 | 07:12 AM (EST)

During March, to mark seven years since the U.S. invasion of Iraq, the Shadow Elite column has been focusing on what I call in my book the "Neocon core," a tiny circle of longtime ideological allies who used their interlocking relationships across government, think tanks, business, and national...

Read Post
Shadow Elite: March to War -- Is Ahmed Chalabi Under Iran's Thumb?
Posted March 18, 2010 | 06:14 AM (EST)

For the rest of March, to mark seven years since the U.S. invasion of Iraq, the Shadow Elite column each week will focus on what I call in my book the "Neocon core," a tiny circle of longtime ideological allies who used their interlocking relationships across government, think...

Read Post
Shadow Elite: March to War -- Rove, Perle, & Truthiness
Posted March 11, 2010 | 06:58 AM (EST)

For the rest of March, to mark seven years since the U.S. invasion of Iraq, the Shadow Elite column each week will focus on what I call in my book the "Neocon core," a tiny circle of longtime ideological allies who used their interlocking relationships across government, think...

Read Post
Shadow Elite: Why Did Military Top Brass Flout Its Own Chain of Command?
Posted March 4, 2010 | 07:13 AM (EST)

This post was co-authored by Linda Keenan and Janine R. Wedel.

In December, Major General Michael T. Flynn told a reporter, "I've always operated so far outside my lane, I'm not sure what lane is mine anymore".

Just weeks later, he delivered...

Read Post
Shadow Elite: Why Sarah Palin's Really Selling Big Government
Posted February 11, 2010 | 07:27 AM (EST)

Sarah Palin was supposed to blast some fresh Arctic air into the Tea Party movement last Saturday, but the breeze I felt seemed awfully stale. Far from "going rogue," Palin became the latest in a long line of politicians to trot out a tired establishment mantra: that America needs to...

Read Post
Shadow Elite: The Spy Who Came in From... Wall Street?
Posted February 4, 2010 | 09:05 AM (EST)

During the Cold War, we took it for granted that officers of the Central Intelligence Agency worked solely for the good of the USA -- or at least their version of the good. They were loyal first, last, and always only to one institution, the CIA. Americans assumed that they...

Read Post
Shadow Elite: Did The Supreme Court Just Trash Democracy and the Free Market?
Posted January 28, 2010 | 07:30 AM (EST)

In a much-debated 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court voted to strike down regulations that stretch well back into the last century (as well as a portion of the 2002 McCain-Feingold act) prohibiting corporations from using their general treasuries, without monetary limits, to finance ads that explicitly call for the victory...

Read Post
Shadow Elite: Do You Know Whose Agenda You're Being Sold?
Posted January 21, 2010 | 06:31 AM (EST)

In the community of fewer than 2,000 in which I grew up, the proverbial six degrees of separation melt away. You can't help but play multiple roles in a small town: A teenager babysits for her next-door neighbor's kids whose father is also her schoolteacher and a colleague of her...

Read Post
For The Shadow Elite Failure Often Guarantees Future Rewards
Posted January 14, 2010 | 08:33 AM (EST)

Far from the old pull-yourself-up-by-the-bootstraps model of acknowledging failure and starting anew, the shadow elite do not admit failure at all. More important, past failure may guarantee their future success. When most of us fail, consequences are not widespread. When the shadow elite fail, it affects all of us because...

Read Post
Is the Government In Charge, Or Is It The Shadow Elite?
Posted January 7, 2010 | 07:30 AM (EST)

Arriving at my home airport after the holidays, I noticed that the zipper on the side of my bulging luggage had broken, and boxes of decorated cookies had fallen out. I enlisted the help of an employee who promised to check whether baggage handlers had found stray belongings on the...

[ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/janine-r-wedel]

One thing that bother's me when I read this type of stuff is the way they're framed, e.g. "Back in the day the X was working for America and democracy and yadda yadda" or "America used to stand for yadda yadda yadda" – and yet these people know, presumably, that this is false. Or they should know because they write about like instances of activity that date back way before "America was all momma's apple pie".

In her piece on the BIA: CIA and Wall Street Wedel writes:

During the Cold War, we took it for granted that officers of the Central Intelligence Agency worked solely for the good of the USA -- or at least their version of the good. They were loyal first, last, and always only to one institution, the CIA. Americans assumed that they had one boss, and one boss alone: the CIA director. But this week came a revelation that shakes that longstanding belief to the core. Today, CIA officers are allowed to moonlight, and ply their espionage skills elsewhere in their free time.

[ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/janine-r- ... 49023.html]

As if this was something new. It's not. What's "new" if anything is that a lot of what counts for "knowledge" – what you get taught in school, through media, etc. – is nothing but "longstanding belief".

When has the CIA not been part of Wall Street? There never was a question of "dual" loyalties. And there isn't.

*

edit: What I mean to say is that the term "modern" in the Op can only mean "contemporary". Not "new".

•
edit: links

[slomo]

One thing that bother's me when I read this type of stuff is the way they're framed, e.g. "Back in the day the X was working for America and democracy and yadda yadda" or "America used to stand for yadda yadda yadda" – and yet these people know, presumably, that this is false. Or they should know because they write about like instances of activity that date back way before "America was all momma's apple pie".

In her piece on the BIA: CIA and Wall Street Wedel writes:

During the Cold War, we took it for granted that officers of the Central Intelligence Agency worked solely for the good of the USA -- or at least their version of the good. They were loyal first, last, and always only to one institution, the CIA. Americans assumed that they had one boss, and one boss alone: the CIA director. But this week came a revelation that shakes that longstanding belief to the core. Today, CIA officers are allowed to moonlight, and ply their espionage skills elsewhere in their free time.

[ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/janine-r- ... 49023.html]

As if this was something new. It's not. What's "new" if anything is that a lot of what counts for "knowledge" – what you get taught in school, through media, etc. – is nothing but "longstanding belief".

When has the CIA not been part of Wall Street? There never was a question of "dual" loyalties. And there isn't.

I think this is merely a rhetorical strategy. Most readers are not psychologically prepared to accept that their national identity is founded on lies, and that the project of America (and, really, Civilization) is one of destruction and enslavement. To start with that understanding is to alienate most readers. Instead, by appealing to a mythical past, the author forges an alliance with her audience. This is actually smart.

[JackRiddler]

One thing that bother's me when I read this type of stuff is the way they're framed, e.g. "Back in the day the X was working for America and democracy and yadda yadda" or "America used to stand for yadda yadda yadda" – and yet these people know, presumably, that this is false. Or they should know because they write about like instances of activity that date back way before "America was all momma's apple pie".

In her piece on the BIA: CIA and Wall Street Wedel writes:

During the Cold War, we took it for granted that officers of the Central Intelligence Agency worked solely for the good of the USA -- or at least their version of the good. They were loyal first, last, and always only to one institution, the CIA. Americans assumed that they had one boss, and one boss alone: the CIA director. But this week came a revelation that shakes that longstanding belief to the core. Today, CIA officers are allowed to moonlight, and ply their espionage skills elsewhere in their free time.

[ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/janine-r- ... 49023.html]

As if this was something new. It's not. What's "new" if anything is that a lot of what counts for "knowledge" – what you get taught in school, through media, etc. – is nothing but "longstanding belief".

When has the CIA not been part of Wall Street? There never was a question of "dual" loyalties. And there isn't.

I think this is merely a rhetorical strategy. Most readers are not psychologically prepared to accept that their national identity is founded on lies, and that the project of America (and, really, Civilization) is one of destruction and enslavement. To start with that understanding is to alienate most readers. Instead, by appealing to a mythical past, the author forges an alliance with her audience. This is actually smart.

I disagree. I think it's a disastrous strategy, one that contributes to the historical and systemic blindness that is one of the most important conditions for maintaining the status quo. It serves to reinforce a false "national identity" that needs to be challenged.

I want to point out how often you will see the reverse strategy in action: bad things are what "we" did in the past, before we learned better. Gunboat interventions and child labor are part of more benighted times, although you shouldn't blame past actors for being "products of their time." These past examples bear no relation to the modern counterterrorist drone-strike interventions, which were forced on us, or "our" trade with Bangladesh clothing mills, which is the price of free enterprise and anyway the best the Bangladeshis can do in improving their lives.

I bring up this other strategy because it relies on a concept of progress or historical discontinuity, just like Wedel's myth of earlier times when the motives of the power-holders were supposedly nobler. I think not understanding the continuity of history reduces our power to know what to do about it today.

The real problem is in the "we." The apologists for today's conditions and critics like Janine Wedel both think their readers are going to identify with the history of "our country" as represented by the actions of past power-holders, presidents, "founding fathers," generals and robber barons. By treating it that way, they reinforce it. Far better would be to acknowledge the historical continuity and seek to engender identification with the popular actors of past times - the abolitionists, the workers' movement, the war resisters, the populists, the people who refused to go along with the Commie witchhunts and the Cold War hysteria, all of whom are equally "products of their time": These should be more "we" than the likes of past CIA directors. It occurs to me that Wedel's strategic avoidance of the past reality (if it really is mere avoidance) would have us believe that the post-1963 CIA was still just an agency seeking to promote "American interests," which is an extreme distortion that disserves us.

Nevertheless, I'm going to assimilate the OP into the Wall Street thread, if you don't mind!

[Simulist]

perfect picture of a modern "transnational elite"

They might be called the "elite," but they're really just lucky thugs who like ascot ties.

[Nordic]

I was trying to do something cute with the headline in regards to satirizing the line "the perfect picture of a modern major general." But it didn't work out, but I left the word "modern" in there just for the hell of it.

[semper occultus]

interesting he's on the Board of Mustafa Koc's Koc Holding A.S.

http://rigorousintuition.ca/board2/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=28404