The Oxford Martin School:
Oxford’s Socialist revolution
15 August 2013
In popular perception Oxford is the very
quintessence of tradition. The reality is that Oxford has long harboured a motley of subversive interests seeking to shape the
nation’s future in line with their own agenda.
Balliol and New College were among the
strongholds of the Milner (Round Table) Group from the late 1800s, while
Corpus Christi and St John’s spawned leading Fabians like Sydney
Olivier, Graham Wallas and Sidney Ball.
By 1895 the London Fabian
Society had established a Fabian
university society at Oxford which, according to the Society’s
annual report, consisted of men who within a few years would occupy posts
of influence and importance across the country (Cole, 1961, p. 63). Some of
its members occupied such posts from the start: one of its first presidents, “Socialist Don”
Sidney Ball (originally from Oriel) was a dominant figure at St
The common objective of these allied groups
has been to push Britain, the Empire (later the Commonwealth) and the world
in the direction of Socialist world government controlled by leaders of the
world’s corporate community (the big international bankers,
industrialists and businessmen). The Oxford Martin School (OMS) squarely
belongs to this tradition.
The School was founded by the left-wing
futurologist, writer and entrepreneur Dr James Martin, a graduate and
honorary fellow of Keble College, Oxford, where he had attended the
lectures of left-wing luminaries like Isaiah Berlin and Bertrand Russell (a
former member of the Fabian Society) who left a deep impression on James’s
young mind (Campbell-Kelly, 2013).
After national service, Dr Martin started
his career at IBM, a Rockefeller-controlled, Rothschild-associated
operation (N M Rothschild & Sons chairman Evelyn de Rothschild was a
long-time director of IBM UK) where he worked as a computer scientist for
almost twenty years (1959-1978). Interestingly, neither the OMS website nor the James
Martin website (last accessed 14 Aug. 2013) mention this
“small detail” in the doctor’s life.
As his interest (or obsession) with the
future grew, Dr Martin came to believe that “technocracy will replace aristocracy”: to solve the world’s
problems, society must educate a generation of revolutionary technocrats
who will lead mankind into a brighter future.
The personal fortune he had made from his
computer books, lectures and business interests provided the means by which
Dr Martin could make his dream come true and, in 2005, he founded the
Oxford Martin School.
Dr Martin’s thinking was influenced
not only by Isaiah Berlin and Bertrand Russell but also by left-wing
billionaires Bill Gates and George Soros
(Daily Telegraph, 27 Jun. 2013).
The latter contributed to the School’s funding and heads the
Institute for New Economic Thinking (INET) which is a member of the School.
Thanks to unusually strong financial
backing – Dr Martin alone contributed $150 million – the School
has grown into a massive operation with about 38 institutes and between 300
and 400 academics (depending on whether we take the figure provided by the
School’s website or its director Ian Goldin)
working across Oxford University. Unsurprisingly, its own architects
describe the School and its impact on the University as a “Revolution in Oxford” (J. Martin, 2012).
Left-wing academia and corporate Socialism
It is clear from the start that the Oxford
Martin School is the product of a combination of left-wing ideology (or
“new thinking” along Fabian Socialist
lines) and international financial interests.
The idea of a body of technical
“experts” heading a new international ruling class who would
solve all the world’s problems is an enduring Socialist fantasy
promoted in the works of Fabian writers like H G
Wells (A Modern Utopia) and Aldous
Huxley (Brave New World) and
periodically cropping up in Fabian and related
publications. It is an idea Socialists have shared with the leaders of the
world’s corporate community (the Rothschilds,
Rockefellers and others) who have used their vast financial resources to
encourage a technocratic worldview in the ranks of the academic community
(Berman, pp. 12 ff.).
Corporate links to Fabian
Socialism were forged during the “Progressive Era” (1890s to
1920s), which was characterised by growing Socialist influence on society.
The London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE), a university
founded by the Fabian Society with money
bequeathed to it for the express purpose of “furthering its
propaganda, objects and Socialism” (Cole, 1949, p. 43), was one of
the first, and most important, Socialist institutions to enjoy corporate
backing. Lord Rothschild, Sir Ernest Cassel,
Joseph Rowntree and other pillars of
“capitalist” finance and industry were only too happy to fund
England’s bastion of Socialism (see The Fabian Society).
Rockefeller institutions like the General
Education and International Education Boards and the Rockefeller Foundation
were set up during the same era and the Rockefellers became particularly
close to the LSE and its brand of Socialism which visiting LSE professors
propagated at Harvard, Columbia and other Rockefeller-funded American
Indeed, corporate interest in Socialism
went beyond funding socialist projects. Oil and banking magnate John D.
Rockefeller Jr., for example, was not only a
financial supporter but also a disciple of John Dewey, president of the
League for Industrial Democracy (LID), formerly Intercollegiate Socialist
Society, which had been created by the American Fabian
League (R. Martin, p. 178) in parallel with the London Fabian
Society’s University Socialist Federation.
J. D. R. Jr.
founded the experimental Lincoln School of New York where he sent his sons
to be indoctrinated in Deweyian thinking by teachers
from the Rockefeller-funded and LID-dominated Teachers College, Columbia
As one might expect, the indoctrination did
not fail to leave a lasting impression on the entire Rockefeller progeny
and “Rockefeller Republicanism” soon became a byword for
left-wing views. But it was David who, of all brothers, took the time to
study Fabian Socialism and to obtain a BSc degree
on a sympathetic thesis entitled “Destitution Through Fabian Eyes” (Harvard, 1936) in which he
favourably compared Fabian Socialism with
David also spent his second post-graduate
year studying economics at the LSE under Fabian
luminaries like Prof Harold Laski (later chairman
of the Fabian Society and the Labour Party). In
the following year, he characteristically invited Oskar
Lange, a notorious Polish Socialist and leading advocate of “Market
Socialism,” to join his thesis committee at the (Rockefeller
co-founded) University of Chicago (Rockefeller, pp. 75, 82-3, 88). David
Rockefeller is an honorary fellow of the LSE and member
of Alumni and Friends of the LSE in the US (AFLSE).
On his part, George Soros,
an immigrant from Hungary, obtained a PhD from the LSE where he studied
under Karl Popper from whom he drew inspiration for his Open Society
Foundations. Popper was an early proponent of the
“Open-Society” theory, which was not only redolent of H. G.
Wells’ Fabian “Open Conspiracy”
but was nothing but Socialist globalism by
another name. Soros has conveniently refused to
define “open society,” merely describing it as a society in
which a person like himself can “live and prosper” (Soros, 1995, p. 113). However, his criticism of capitalism and nationalism,
insistence on constructing a collectively ruled “global open
society” steered by elements like himself (see Soros,
2000) and long-time activism for Democratic and other left-wing causes,
leave no doubt as to his true political allegiance.
What the above figures – Rockefeller,
Soros, Dr Martin, OMS director Ian Goldin and associates – all have in common with
Socialist thought is the quasi-religious (or pathological) belief in their personal
mission to change the world, to bring about a “large-scale
transformation of humanity” in fulfilment of their utopian fantasies.
In this unholy alliance of left-wing
academia and corporate power the latter has the undisputed upper hand. As
pointed out by the economist Joseph A Schumpeter (David Rockefeller’s
tutor at Harvard), the true pacemakers of Socialism are not the
intellectuals or agitators who preach it but “the Vanderbilts,
Carnegies and Rockefellers” (Schumpeter, p. 134).
It is not difficult to see why this should
be the case. Socialism is a system that requires vast amounts of funding to
sustain its welfare and other utopian programmes that cannot all be
sustained by taxes. This inevitably leads to mounting public borrowing,
debt and dependence on lenders and donors who are thus placed in a position
where they can dictate public policy and practice.
The above explains why Socialism is
inextricably linked to monopolistic financial and industrial interests, a
fact not generally recognised by the system’s rank and file but well
understood by its more pragmatic (and better informed) leaders like Lord Mandelson and Tony Blair. Although routinely dubbed
“capitalist” by outsiders and by those engaged in diversionary
propaganda, these interests clearly are anti-capitalist
by virtue of their monopolistic practices aiming to concentrate resources
and power in the hands of a self-appointed corporate elite and their
support for socialistic programmes aiming to “reform” or
“transform,” i.e., subvert and ultimately destroy, traditional
capitalist society (see Socialism exposed).
In his book, The Meaning of the 21st Century: A Vital Blueprint for Ensuring Our Future (2006), Dr
Martin himself explains that multinational corporations are “the only
human organisation capable of achieving the complex and difficult tasks
that are ahead”, which is why they must play a greater role in the
world’s affairs and in solving its problems (J. Martin, 2007, p. 292).
Needless to say, taking a greater role in
world affairs is exactly what the international corporate community intends
to do – and has been doing all along, with or without academic
approval or consent. Dr Martin’s suggestion merely confirms that the
left wings of the academic and corporate communities are of one mind. This
mutually convenient arrangement ensures a guaranteed income for the former
and greater power and influence for the latter – a genuinely vital
blueprint for ensuring the future of both.
The close links, unity of ideology and
collaboration between the Oxford Martin School and the corporate community
are further exposed by the School’s director, Professor Ian Goldin, and its advisory council.
Prof Goldin is a
South African of Austrian origin who holds a MSc
from the London School of Economics as well as a fellowship at Balliol
College, Oxford, and who, before joining the Oxford Martin School, served
as vice-president of the World Bank (2003-2006) as well as head of the
Bank’s collaboration with the United Nations.
Before that, Prof Goldin
was principal economist at the European Bank for Reconstruction and
Development (EBRD), London, which was set up in 1991 by Jacques Attali, a long-time Rothschild associate, former
adviser to France’s Socialist President François Mitterrand and
himself a committed Marxist and advocate of world government.
From 1996 to 2001 Prof Goldin
was chief executive and managing director of the Development Bank of
Southern Africa (DBSA) during which time he served as adviser to President
Nelson Mandela (a member of the South African Communist Party)
and received the World
Economic Forum’s ominously-named Global Leader of Tomorrow (GLT)
Award along with Victor Chu (see below). Other
recipients of the Award have included leading politicians like Tony Blair,
Nicolas Sarkozy and José Manuel Barroso; Rothschild associates like Vincent Bolloré
and Felix Rohatyn; directors of global banking
giants like JP Morgan Chase and Goldman Sachs and many other members of the
world’s new ruling class.
The typical WEF member company is a global
enterprise with more than $5 billion in turnover and WEF strategic partners
(hand-picked for their alignment with the WEF agenda) include industrial
and banking giants with Rockefeller connections like Saudi Aramco (originally a Rockefeller-Saudi joint venture),
Chevron, JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup, Morgan
Stanley, Goldman Sachs and, in particular, the Rockefeller Foundation which
has special status as strategic
In addition to Prof Goldin,
Oxford Martin School’s advisory council includes:
Victor Chu, chairman, First Eastern Investment Group, Hong Kong; member,
foundation board, World Economic Forum (WEF) alongside Peter Sutherland,
former director-general, World Trade Organisation, chairman and managing
director, Goldman Sachs International (for Sutherland’s pro-immigrant
stance see Sutherland, 15 June 2012 and
similar publications); Klaus Schwab, founder and executive chairman, WEF,
member, advisory board, Investcorp (a joint
venture between the Rockefellers’ Chase Manhattan Bank and the Arab
League’s Arab Monetary Fund); and Christine Lagarde,
managing director, International Monetary Fund
Mo Ibrahim, founder, Mo Ibrahim Foundation, which
promotes “good governance” (i.e., governance promoting the
interests of left-wing international finance and its political
collaborators) in Africa
Pascal Lamy, director general, World Trade Organisation; chair, Oxford Martin
Commission for Future Generations (whose vice-chair is Ian Goldin)
Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, former managing director,
World Bank; Minister of Finance, Nigeria – an oil-rich country with
long-standing links to the Fabian Society and Rockefeller interests (Jonathan,
Zhou Qifeng, president, Peking University, Beijing
Amartya Sen, professor of economics,
(Rockefeller-associated) Harvard University; trustee, Economists for Peace
and Security (whose founding trustee Lawrence Klein was former president of
the Fabian American Economic Association);
husband of Emma Rothschild (daughter of Labour peer Lord Victor Rothschild
and director of the Rockefeller-controlled United Nations Foundation)
professor of economics and government, LSE; chair, (Rothschild-associated)
Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment, LSE
Joseph Stiglitz, former senior vice-president, World Bank; professor of
international affairs, (Rockefeller-associated) Columbia University; collaborator
of left-wing billionaire George Soros (who is a
leading member and co-funder of Oxford Martin
School); collaborator of left-wing economist Michael Rothschild; founder of
the global think-tank Institute for Policy Dialogue (IPD), which is funded
by the allied Rockefeller, Ford and MacArthur
The OMS advisory council confirms the
School’s strong links to the corporate community and its close-knit
network of international organisations involved in global governance (United
Nations, World Economic Forum, World Trade Organisation, World Bank,
International Monetary Fund) as well as educational establishments,
academic institutions and research centres (London School of Economics,
Harvard University, Columbia University, Economists for Peace and Security,
Institute for Policy Dialogue) promoting a left-wing corporate agenda.
blueprint for the future?
As stated earlier, OMS
academics, their collaborators and corporate paymasters believe themselves
to be destined and entitled to shape the future of mankind in accordance
with their own utopian fantasies. This belief is confirmed by the
literature they have produced and by the organisations
and other devices they have set up such as the Global Leader of Tomorrow
Award, the Oxford Martin Commission for Future Generations, the Future of Humanity Institute (which is
part of the OMS and headed by Swedish LSE graduate Nick Bostrom),
In Prof Goldin’s
own words, the School’s mission is to understand the most critical
problems facing the world and to “make better futures for all of
us” (Goldin, 2013). Thus, the School and
those who run it indisputably see themselves as the makers of mankind’s future.
Prof Goldin has
also spoken of global challenges that need global solutions, of the failure
of global leaders to find such solutions and of the need to create new
global governance structures to redress this failure (Goldin,
Prof Goldin does
not make it sufficiently clear why the existing structures have failed or
were allowed to fail and why he expects new structures to deliver better
results. After all, earlier organisations tasked with global governance and
“solving the world’s problems” (the League of Nations,
the United Nations, etc.) were the creation of the same class of academic
“experts” in collaboration with the same corporate community
(the Rockefellers, etc.).
The economy and immigration are of central
concern to Prof Goldin and his collaborators at
the OMS. George Soros, whose Institute for New Economic
Thinking (INET) is a leading member of the School, has said that economic
theory is in a crisis because its very foundations have proved to be
inadequate; that this is “one of the most urgent and pressing issues
for mankind”; and that he hopes that his Institute will “completely rethink economic theory”
(J. Martin, 2012).
In other words, the economic theories
promoted for nearly a century by Fabian
economists like John Maynard Keynes and their corporate backers have been
just old wives’ tales – not to say a collection of fraudulent
propositions, designed to implement gradual state control of the economy.
In fact, the uselessness of economic theory
has long been exposed by people who are in a position to know, such as
Chancellor Denis Healey (Healey, pp. 377-83). And we are expected to
believe that the world’s “experts” have only just
discovered this and that they will now promptly devise “better”
(read more radical) theories
– which presumably will take another century
or so to prove right or wrong, as the case may be.
Meanwhile, what the above professors and
their corporate financiers all agree on, is that
immigration is supposedly good for the economy. In fact, their publications
list immigration among the critical problems facing the world. The thought
that sustained mass immigration might lead to population replacement,
ethnic cleansing or genocide does not seem to cross their mind even though
official figures show that the replacement rate in the UK has already
reached 20 per cent and is likely to reach over 50 per cent of the total
population by the 2060s (Coleman, 2010; Silverman, 2013).
condescends to admit that immigration can produce social dislocation and
discontent in the receiving population. He nevertheless insists that
immigration makes the economy – and Oxford University – more
“competitive” (Goldin, 2013). And
what is good for Oxford and its foreign professors is good for the country
and the world …
deplores the fact that current immigration policies are made without
consideration for the “long-term benefits of a coordinated global
policy” (Goldin, 2011, p. 164). The man
charged with co-ordinating global policy on immigration is none other than
Peter Sutherland, head of the UN Global Forum on Migration and Development
who took up his post at about the same time Prof Goldin
took his and who is a member of the WEF foundation board which nominated Goldin for its Global Leader of Tomorrow Award.
Sutherland and associates intend to make a “better future” for
us is suggested by their own statements. Mr Sutherland has infamously
called on European Union governments to do their best to “undermine the national homogeneity”
of European states and believes that the migration of hundreds of millions
of Africans to Europe in search of work in the next few decades is “a good thing” (Sutherland, 15 and 20 June 2012; Wheeler, 2012).
On his part, Prof Goldin
for whom immigration has been a “life-long passion” and
who believes that open borders are “an ideal to work towards,”
has announced that immigration will define our future and has called for
more immigration. To say that the future of the British people should be
defined by immigration, that is, by
immigrants and not by the British people themselves, is a profoundly
racist proposition. But there is worse to come. Prof Goldin
firmly believes that the thought that we are pure-bred Europeans must be
overcome and that we should all “think of ourselves as Africans”
instead (Goldin, 2013).
This amounts to denying Europeans their
right to life: if a population
is denied the right to define its own future, the right to its own
territory and the right to its own cultural and ethnic identities, then it
is denied the right to exist. The Oxford Martin School’s
“blueprint for the future” can result in nothing less than the
deliberate and systematic annihilation of Europe’s people, culture
The School interlocks with organisations
that have a direct influence on public policy-making. For example, the International Migration Institute
(IMI), an OMS member institute, is involved in the work and analysis of the
Migration Observatory, Oxford, whose director Dr Martin Ruhs
– like Goldin and associates –
believes that immigration is “good for the economy” and has
served as adviser to a string of pro-immigrant bodies like the
International Labour Organisation
(ILO), the International Organisation for
Migration (IOM), the Global Commission on International Migration (GCIM)
and the UN Development Programme (UNDP), and is a
member of the Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) which was set up by the Labour administration in 2007 and continues to advise
the Government on immigration issues.
LSE chairman Sutherland and fellow travellers themselves are board
members at the influential left-wing journal Global Policy, a partner of the LSE
Public Policy Group (PPG) which works closely with
Enterprise LSE and LSE Research and Contracts Office, who are respectively
responsible for undertaking project management and contract negotiations
for all PPG activities and handling grant-funded research.
Global Policy’s general editor is David
Held, former Graham Wallas professor of political
science (named after the Fabian Society leader
and first professor of political science) and co-director of the Centre for
the Study of Global Governance, LSE.
Global Policy’s editorial statement (last accessed
15 Aug 2013) predicts that the journal will be invaluable to those working
in economics, global politics, government and other disciplines involved in
developing global policy. Given the financial, academic and political
heavyweights involved, it is a prediction that comes close to a statement
What becomes clear is that the Oxford Martin
School is an integral part of the global Fabian-LSE
network of policy-planning and opinion-forming organisations, which is an
extension of the international corporate community. And this means that we
can safely expect it to operate within guidelines set by its corporate
patrons and serving their interests – which is
precisely why the likes of George Soros are
Soros’s newly-discovered image of
selfless Oxford scientist and benefactor who is worried over the state of
the world’s economy should not deflect attention from the man behind
the façade. Given his more colourful past as long-time Rothschild agent,
ruthless speculator and gold market manipulator who reportedly “broke the Bank of England”
and was involved in a “plot to cash in on the fall of the euro”
by placing large bets against the currency (Litterick,
2002; West, 2010), this may prove to be a case of poacher turned
Together with Prof Goldin’s
apparent lack of concern for the fate of Britain’s (and
Europe’s) indigenous population, it casts serious doubts on the
legitimacy and moral propriety of the whole Martin School project. At any
rate, the School’s technocratically and plutocratically manufactured “blueprint for the
future” has no place in democratic society. It must not be allowed to
(This article was last
updated on 18 August 2013)
The Migration Observatory
The Fabian Society
Nelson Mandela: “President of the World”
or “murderous terrorist”?
H., The Influence of the Carnegie,
Ford and Rockefeller Foundations on American Foreign Policy: The Ideology
of Philanthropy, Albany, NY, 1983.
“James Martin obituary,” Guardian,
28 Jun. 2013.
Cole, Margaret Isobel (ed), The Webbs and Their Work, London,
1949, quoted in Pugh, Patricia, Educate,
Agitate, Organize: 100 Years of Fabian Socialism, London, 1984, p. 54.
Cole, Margaret, The Story of Fabian
Socialism, London, 1961.
Coleman, David, “When Britain
becomes “majority minority””, Prospect, 17 Nov. 2010.
Telegraph, “James Martin Obituary,” 27 Jun. 2013.
Goldin, Ian, Exceptional People: How Migration Shaped Our World and Will Define
Our Future, Woodstock, Oxfordshire, 2011.
Goldin, Ian, “What if rich countries
shut the door on immigration?,” World Economic Forum Blog,
21 Sept. 2012.
Goldin, Ian, “Exceptional People: How
Migration Shaped Our World and Will Define Our Future,” Prof Ian Goldin, Director, Oxford Martin School, talks to Hein de
Haas, Co-Director, International Migration Institute, May 2013, webcast on www.oxfordmartin.ox.ac.uk.
Healey, Denis, The Time of My Life, 1989, reprinted
Jonathan, Goodluck, “Nigeria: Rockefeller Foundation summit
on realizing the potential of African agriculture,” Indepth Africa, 9 Jul. 2013; for
Rockefeller, Ford and Carnegie links to Nigeria and other African countries
see also Berman, pp. 74-6.
“Billionaire who broke the Bank of England,” Daily Telegraph, 13 Sept. 2002.
Martin, James, The Meaning of the 21st
Century: A Vital Blueprint for Ensuring Our Future, 2006, revised
edition, New York, NY, 2007.
Martin, James, director
and producer, Revolution in Oxford,
short propaganda film, June 2012 download
MP4 (170 MB).
Martin, Rose, Fabian Freeway: High Road to Socialism in the
U.S.A., Chicago, IL, 1966.
David, Memoirs, New York, NY,
Schumpeter, Joseph A., Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy,
1942, 3rd edn., New York, NY, 1950.
Silverman, Rosa, “White Britons ‘will be
minority’ by 2066, says professor,” Daily Telegraph, 2 May 2013.
George, Soros on Soros:
Staying Ahead of the Curve, Hoboken, NJ, 1995.
George, Open Society: Reforming Global Capitalism,
Peter, “A Constructive Attitude to Migration is a Moral Issue,”
Address to the International Eucharistic Congress, Dublin, 15 Jun. 2012.
Peter in Select Committee
on the European Union, House of Lords, “Inquiry on Global Approach to
Migration and Mobility, Evidence Session No. 1, Wednesday 20 June 2012,
11.25 am, Witness: Mr Peter Sutherland, QQ
1-34”, uncorrected transcript, published 22 June 2012.
West, Karl, “Man who broke the Bank of England, George Soros, ‘at centre of hedge funds plot to cash in
on the fall of the euro,’” Daily
Mail, 27 Feb 2010.
Wheeler, Brian, “EU should ‘undermine national
homogeneity’ says UN migration chief,” BBC News, 21 Jun. 2012.
’Revolt on the Right’: UKIP and the Fabian
Crimea, Ukraine and the Anglo-American New World Order
Nelson Mandela: “President of the World” or
Diversity is Not a Catholic Value
it’s Saturday, it’s the Germans again – or why the Mail has lost the plot
a British revolution
Do white people have a future in South Africa?
Conservatives: The Inklings in Their Political Context
there a “need” for immigrants?
The Labour Party, a puppet of
the Fabian Society
The truth about the Labour
truth about the Fabian Society
The Milner-Fabian Conspiracy against humanity
Socialism’s prescient critics
The Politically Incorrect Guide to Socialism
Britain divided by Islam, survey finds
Abolish this corrupt chamber – the House of
Commons, that is
The Real Churchill
The last days of a white world
A Webb of Lies
Socialism and Incentives
Ratiu, Ioan, The Milner-Fabian Conspiracy: How an
international elite is taking over and destroying Europe, America and the
World, Richmond, 2012.
Quigley, Carroll, The Anglo-American Establishment: From
Rhodes to Cliveden, GSG & Associates, San
Pedro, CA, 1981.
Martin, Rose, Fabian
Freeway: High Road to Socialism in the U.S.A., Chicago,
Eric D., The Fabian
Socialist Contribution to the Communist Advance, Melbourne, 1964.
Dorril, Stephen, MI6: Fifty Years of Special Operations, London, 2001.
Horowitz, David &
Poe, Richard, The Shadow Party: How
George Soros, Hillary Clinton and Sixties Radicals
seized control of the Democratic Party, Nashville, TN, 2006.
Ye’or, Bat, Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis, Madison, NJ,
Bawer, Bruce, While Europe Slept: How Radical Islam Is Destroying The West From
Within, New York, NY, 2006.
et al., The Black Book of Communism:
Crimes, Terror, Repression, Engl. translation, Cambridge, MA and
Williamson, Kevin, The Politically Incorrect Guide to
Socialism, Washington, DC,
Hitchens, Peter, The Abolition of Britain: From Winston Churchill to Princess Diana,
Knight, Nigel, Churchill: The Greatest Briton Unmasked,
Newton Abbot, Devon, 2008.
Docherty, Gerry & MacGregor, James, Hidden
History: The Secret Origins of the First World War, Edinburgh, 2013.