Forget the word conspiracy when it comes to explaining how globalization or centralized control turns the world into an extremely unstable environment where centralized management is possible, and where a sneeze from one of the controllers will end up shaking half of the world. Furthermore, forget about the “conspiracy theory” and “conspiracy theorist” labels to insult people who believe in something that physics has proven to exist.

Call it the New World Order, the Old World Order, the cabal of mad Anglo-Saxon men who want to control it all, or simply call it the product of self-organization. What matters is that the existence of a global network of corporate control has been proven beyond all doubt. A study titled The Network of Global Corporate Control, was the first complete analysis of complex economic networks that looked at economics as one would look at a swarm of birds, insects or brain connections to understand how a small group of people indeed control what happens in the world.

In order to understand how a completely interconnected world is more vulnerable to systemic collapse, the authors used tools found in Physics to analyze complex relationships between transnational corporations and how the ownership of those corporations influences what happens with economics around the world. But the study went beyond formulas and fractions. They applied formulas to understand how a global corporate control network truly infects everything — for bad as we have now experienced — on their analysis of complex systems, which in most cases are studied for the sum of their parts, but not their interconnectedness.[pullquote align=”right”]Yes, the power to decide is in the hands of a few hundred people who own a few hundred companies which control thousands of other companies.[/pullquote]

As it was discovered, the parts of a whole, the individual elements of the world’s economic system are not the most important elements to study when trying to figure out why a globalized world is indeed a more vulnerable one. It is the influence exerted by the powerful members of the complex economic network which determines what happens to us all as units who depend on what is decided by people we have never heard about, seen on television or met personally.

How does the global corporate control network operate?

What researchers Stefania Vitali, James B. Glattfelder and Stefano Battiston did was use chunks of reality, transform them into mathematical formulas, effectively taking that reality from its natural state to a formal state. One curious finding about how a corporate global network controls it all, is that the data utilized to determine how much influence a few corporations exercise over the rest of us, has been available for years, but no study had been conducted to find what they found. In fact, if there is anything true about the way reality is shaped, is that the controllers strive for hiding reality behind veils of cloudy facts and subjective conclusions to distract the people and to maintain their system of control operating from the shadows. But once that ‘real’ reality was decoded by physics without the influence of dogma, the veils simply disappeared.

One of the reasons why it is so hard to understand reality, is because people usually look at it as a whole, not as the sum of its parts or as the network of links that unite the different and often numerous nodes or components. For this, one needs to think in 3D, to use a popular term. In order to understand how the world really works, it is necessary to study the simple rules of interaction instead of looking at the components of the whole. The global system, through the interaction of its components, shows patterns that allow us to predict the results of those interactions. This is how the people behind data mining enterprises such as Google or Facebook, for example, use supercomputers to map behaviors and ‘predict’ what the future will be like, what people may or may not do.

What researchers did was to study the interactions between the components so they could determine how and why these components influenced the world, especially when it came to economics. Each node represented a mover or shaker, a corporation, while the lines that linked the nodes represented the interactions that occurred specifically in economic networks. “The study we published was the first extensive analysis of economic networks,” said James B. Glattfelder at a TED conference in Zurich. So why didn’t anyone carry out a study like this before?

Glattfelder and his colleagues looked in detail at ownership networks, where the nodes represented individuals, corporations or governments, the links between these nodes represented percentages of ownership by those individuals, firms and governments which determined the value of the company according to its operating revenue. Researchers found out how much of B is owned by A to conclude how much influence A has on B and everything else that is connected to it. As it turns out, ownership networks reveal patterns about shareholding relations.

The direct relation between ownership networks and control is such, that it is possible to discover who are the key players, how much influence do they exercise, whether they operate alone or in combination with other key players, and what is the overall distribution of control. These relationships ultimately reveal who truly controls the world.

So who controls the world and what does the control they have mean for the stability of the world?

[pullquote align=”left”]146 owners of large corporations or 0.024 percent of the total, are capable of controlling 40 percent of the value generated by the transnational corporations.[/pullquote]When globalization was first introduced as a model for development, it was painted as the greatest way to promote growth and equality much like Al Gore promoted the implementation of Free Trade Agreements as the best way to have access to foreign markets, even though in practice it meant the complete deindustrialization of the United States.

In reality, however, globalization made it easier for key players to control it all, which made the global economy more prone to systemic risk, because a decision made in Brussels or Washington would affect prices, markets, supply and demand across the globe. In a sense, the world became too connected to fail.

As the aforementioned key players had planned, the high degree of connectivity gave them leverage to carry out their business operations while at the same time facilitated the spread of instability throughout the whole system. If they were the controllers, they could decide what to do and how to influence the world for their own benefit.

In order to establish the relationship between key players and how they can mold the economic landscape, researchers took a sample of 13 million ownership relations with a specific focus on transnational corporations. In their investigation, researchers found a total of 43,000 influential transnational corporations which they used together with the 13 million ownership relations between shareholders. The result of these relationships provided a total of 60,000 nodes (individuals, companies, governments) and 1,000,000 links.

All the nodes and links can be visualized as a periphery of key players that worked around a more influential center. The influential center was composed by about 75% of the movers and shakers or 460,000 members. Somewhere in that center, investigators also identified a core with 1,300 nodes or members with even more interconnected relationships. According to Glattfelder, as little as 36 percent of the transnational corporations are grouped in the core and they control as much as 95 percent of the total operating revenue. The next questions to ask is, how does control of revenue translate into control? In today’s world, It is not a secret that money talks, money buys votes, builds circles of influence and in many cases it simply gives voting rights.

The voting rights in the hands of the few allowed researchers to compute the control and individual gets from the ownership of shares or the relationships it has within its own company or among a group of companies. So, a simple majority in ownership a person control over a company, but also buys control and influence in other companies. If one follows this pattern, the end result is clear: ownership and control multiples and more importantly expands, which allows a select group of people to decide what is done, when, how and why.[pullquote align=”right”]”The powers of financial capitalism had another far reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. Profesor Carroll Quigley, Universidad de Georgetown.[/pullquote]

The degree of control over the value of the transnational corporations translates into a certain degree of influence which then converts into centralized control. That is why the controllers are able to impose their will despite the fact that the majority, those who operate outside the core or even outside the center, strongly oppose their ideas. The picture painted by the study The Network of Global Corporate Control, confirms how monopoly and monopolists work.

After computing the results of their study of ownership control, researchers found out that 737 top shareholders (individuals, companies or governments) or 0.123 percent of the total, control 80 percent of the transnational corporations value.

The study also showed that most of the members and key players contained in the 0.123 percent are financial institutions located in the United States and the United Kingdom. When researchers looked more closely to the core, they found out that as few as 146 owners of large corporations or 0.024 percent of the total, are capable of controlling 40 percent of the value generated by the transnational corporations.

Concentration of network control and operating revenue. The network of global corporate control. S. Vitali, J.B. Glattfelder, and S. Battiston. 2011

The study concludes that the high the degree of control showed in the investigation is very high by any known standard. The high degree of inter-connectivity created by the key players by owning significant portions of complete sectors of the global economy poses significant systemic risk.

This is the reason why politicians and bankers came up with the ‘too big to fail’ hoax, because they are so heavily invested in the global control system that any sharp change in governmental policy or corporate decision can result in a worldwide cataclysm from which neither them nor the average people can survive.

It is important to say that the existence of the current inter-connectedness is not a result of randomness, but the goal of at least 50 years of political and ideological fights among many sectors of the core that sought the best way possible to control as much as they could to be able to steer policy in the direction that best benefited their interests.

The structure unveiled by the study may be the result of self-organization, as Mr. Glattfelder points out, but that self-organization is not something that happened randomly. Individuals, organizations, companies and governments consciously determine how to organize themselves to make the most of everything and in the case of the centralized global control network it is not an exception.

If the current centralized global control network depends on the rules of interaction in the global system and those rules of interaction are established by families or groups of people who have controlled society for centuries, and who generation after generation have determined the road that humanity must follow, then the existence of the centralized global control network is indeed the result of a top down structure.

Whether or not the current system of control is a global conspiracy or not is not important at this point. What is really important is to identify who the movers and shakers are, how they exert influence through their relationships and what it all means to the rest of us. Much of their plan has already been uncovered by independent investigations which happen to coincide on one point: The members of the core do not want the rest of us around. They have said so themselves.

Leave a Reply

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