Brandeis Part 5: Industrial Democracy and the Protocol of Peace

“Sidney Webb is often represented as a descendent of the utilitarians. Social democracy and the welfare state thus stand as the continuing development of Enlightenment rationalism. Alternatively, Webb appears as the representative of a new managerial and administrative class. Social democracy and the welfare state here stand as the elitist and bureaucratic expressions of the power of this class.”

Abstract, Sidney Webb: Utilitarianism, Positivism, and Social Democracy, Mark Bevir. Bevir is Director of the Center for British Studies, and professor in the Department of Political Science, University of California at Berkeley.

“even those who regard our facts as accurate, and accept our economic theory as scientific, will only agree in our judgment of Trade Unionism, and in our conception of its permanent but limited function in the Industrial Democracy of the future.” ix, Preface, Industrial Democracy, Sidney and Beatrice Webb.“

“In our final chapter we even venture upon precept and prophecy; and we consider the exact scope of Trade Unionism in the fully developed democratic state – the industrial democracy of the future.” ix, Preface, Industrial Democracy, Sidney and Beatrice Webb.

“He [Brandeis] spoke before citizen’s groups and legislative bodies, wrote articles for popular magazines, put his ideas about industrial democracy in the briefs he submitted as a lawyer and later in the opinions he wrote as a Supreme Court justice (1916-1938), and advised presidents Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt.” KU Scholar Works, Kansas University.

From times long predating both Brandeis and Webb, men have attempted to resolve the human condition through experimental social reform. A century prior to Brandeis and Webb, Robert Owen and the early 19th century cooperative movements were foundational to Henri de Saint Simon, Auguste Comte and the rise of utopian socialism of the mid 19th century on France. And, the more modern, Fabian led ethical socialist movement of the early 20th century, a direct outgrowth of those same utopians.  And when we fully trace back to source the modern ideas found within the Webbs’ very socially pivotal, Industrial Democracy we see a continuity of thought of deeper historical value, as all of these men find brotherhood with the even earlier philosophies of 17th and 18th century thinkers like Jeremy Bentham and David Hume. And here an important observation needs to be made as to set the tone for the remainder of this article and series.

Conventional history places George Bernard Shaw as a prominent playwright, political activist and social critic.  Few will mention his membership in the Fabian Society, and even fewer will tell you of his deepest wishes:

“There is an extraordinary number of people of whom I want to kill.”

It is critical to know here, and worth the digression, that by being identified as a descendent of the utilitarians, Sidney Webb is being immediately associated zero degrees of separation from Jeremy Bentham, the father of utilitarianism – or the pragmatic determining of correct action by focusing on outcomes. Like do neoliberal movements who today preach of the greater good and social justice outcomes, yet they know nothing of where this thought originated.  A slight shifting of the goalposts from ‘equality of opportunity’ to ‘equality of outcome’. Two very different approaches to social theory, one concerned with the beginning, one concerned with the end result.  Here again we see the pragmatic approach of ends justifying the means.   

According to Bentham and the utilitarians, the best public utility – the ultimate ends to which any individual within the State could pursue – is that pursuit which brings the greatest happiness to the greatest number of people. An ends sounding a lot more like the future perfect promise of the utopian socialist, or the manufactory owner, or the labour union leader, or the head of Pfizer.

Certainly the subservience of the individual was what was being instituted, an industrial democracy made it a prerequisite. The scientific management now revealing a longview.

Comte widely considered the first philosopher of science, the father of social science, or sociology, and founder of modern positivism. Positivism a great rejection of all ideas that aren’t gathered through experience. Intuition, introspection considered meaningless through the positivist verification principle. Intuition, or the collective perception of all your senses into and formed into a gut feeling are no longer accepted, “burned as if sophistry” is our ability to consider or contemplate as the etymological definition of intuition, intuit, suggests. Neither no longer acceptable is the ability to look within ourselves for answers, to evaluate our own spirit and soul. This rejection of anything outside the realm of acceptable sources sounding a lot like today’s claims of fake news and this blind belief in the scientific expert, or the belief that only the opinions of those experienced in whatever matter being discussed should be considered. The appeal to authority or the argumentum ad auctoritatum. The result, a largely blissfully ignorant population of television watchers.

“In the Anglo-Saxon world of to-day we find that Trade Unions are democracies: that is to say, their internal constitutions are all based on the principle of “government of the people, by the people, for the people.” Pg. v, vi, Preface, Industrial Democracy.

Sidney and Beatrice Webb wrote in their ‘scientific’ analysis of British industrial relations, The History of Trade Unionism in 1894, that “sociology, like all other sciences, can advance only upon the basis of a precise observation of actual facts.” 

“For the Webbs and their American counterparts, ‘the professional expert, whether civil servant or representative, was of decisive importance’ in bringing about industrial democracy. Americans quickly noticed the idea, as it appealed to their newly found sense of rational or objective science as a means to solve social and economic problems. American adherents to industrial democracy, including future Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis, saw in it a vehicle to rationalize American industry within a democratic framework.” Pg. 11, Triangle Shirt Waist, the Protocol of Peace and Industrial Democracy in Progressive Era New York, Richard A. Greenwald.

“Many American progressives were keenly aware of European experiences with labor problems. They studied Europe for guidance or a model. Industrial democracy, one such import, is most often associated with Sidney and Beatrice Webb and their circle of British Fabian socialists. The Webbs, in their seminal 1897 book Industrial Democracy, called for a reinvigorated democracy, one where unions played a central role. For the Webbs, modern capitalist industry had put an undue strain on democratic society. Unions could bring democracy to industry … as democratic institutions themselves, they offered the best hope of bringing … democracy to society. 

Brandeis was very familiar with the work of the Fabian Society since as early as the Haymarket Affair on May 4, 1886. His close friends at the House of Truth included Fabian Society members Walter Lippmann and Harold Laski. Laski a Harvard lecturer and professor at the Webb founded, London School of Economics. Lippmann close, personal friends with another Fabian founder, Graham Wallas. Wallas dedicating his, The Great Society to Lippmann in 1914. The Great Society and Industrial Democracy here being synonymous. Brandeis chose, industrial democracy as the future model of America and then manifested it into reality through his nearly omniscient authority.

A young Sidney Webb. Founder of the Fabian Society and London School of Economics. Funder of the National Consumers League.
Sidney and Beatrice Webb, authors of Industrial Democracy, 1897.

Brandeis, chairman of the Arbitration Board of the Protocol of Peace with Walter Weyl and Hamilton Holt. Weyl the author of, The New Democracy (1913) and resident of the House of Truth. A look through the minutes shows Brandeis very much the star witness, or the festival headlining act of the entire proceedings. The last to speak after a role call of progressive efficiency experts. The owner of the House of Truth, Robert Grosvenor Valentine testifies, as does Frederick Winslow Taylor, Henry L. Gantt, Carl G. Barth, and Harrington Emerson. A group of men already controlled by Brandeis.

“If they should fail to agree, then there was recourse to this board of arbitration with Mr. Brandeis as chairman.

THE ACTING CHAIRMAN. Who were the others?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. Hamilton Holt and Mr. Walter Weyl of New York.

THE ACTING CHAIRMAN. Not in the industry?

Mr. WILLIAMS. No; I think they were all outside of the industry … I am told that the board of grievances – the commission – did not dispose of the cases fast enough, and it was charged, on the part of the union, that they were allowed to accumulate … and the union became more and more dissatisfied; they demanded there be an umpire, that there should be somebody to cast the deciding vote on that board. That led to a fierce controversy in which several good men went down, and it very nearly ruptured the protocol and cause a general strike; … it was then changed to this plan that I have suggested, and the employers consented to have an impartial man, but with this change, that instead of this impartial man being at the head of the board of grievances that he was only to be one of three, and two clerks and himself, who should act as this committee, so that the board of grievances becomes a consultative body now and is now in active use for the adjustment of grievances.”

The Testimony of Mr. Louis D. Brandeis:

“Mr. CHAIRMAN, my special interest in this subject arises from a conviction that in the first place the workingmen, and in the second the members of the community generally, can attain the ideals of our American democracy only through an immediate increase and perhaps a constant increase in the productivity of man. We hear a great deal about the inequality in the distribution of wealth and in the proceeds and the profits derived from industry. The progress that we have made in improving the condition of the workingmen during the last century, and particularly during the last 50 years, has been largely due to the fact that the intervention or the introduction of machinery has gone so far in increasing the productivity of the individual man. The misfortune in connection with the introduction of machinery and the revolution that came with it is, or was, that when that introduction of a method of increasing the productivity of man was made labor did not get the share to which it was entitled. With the advent of the new science of management has come the next great opportunity for increasing labor’s share in production; and it seems to me, therefore, of the utmost importance not only that the science should be developed and should be applied as far as possible, but that it should be applied in cooperation with the representatives of organized labor in order that labor may now in this new movement get its proper share.” Pg. 991, Efficiency Systems and Labor, Commission on Industrial Relations.


 You can see the making of the social contract built right in Brandeis testimony:

“science of management is nothing more than an organized effort, pursued intensively, to eliminate waste … it is absolutely essential that the unions be represented in the process …  In the next place – the first bears, of course, upon the adopting of what is the standard – but the next thing comes in applying some matter, some incentive, as you may call it, or a reward of a fair division of the profits resulting from the introduction of the new system. Now what is fair? What is the amount which ought to go to labor is a subject which can not be determined by any scientific investigation.

It is a matter for the exercise of judgment, judgment as to what not only shall be the best and the proper incentive but judgment as to what is just, what is consistent with the interests of the community, all of the conditions which surround introduction, and all of the conditions which concern the pursuit of business under these new conditions, just as those concern the conduct of business under the old conditions, demand that labor should have its representatives in the solution of these problems.” Now the George Bernard Shaw video talking about tribunals.

Eliminating waste can have more than one meaning in the same way ameliorating the poor and needy can.

Seems strange that these social science engineers, that despite advocating scientific management as the solution for every problem of labor and capital, when faced with solving the question of fair compensation, it becomes all-of-a-sudden a problem that, “can not be determined by any scientific investigation”. All of a sudden, all the science in the world couldn’t be trusted to find an equitable division of profit as easily as it had or as readily as it was being used by capital to increase the productivity of the labourer and nearly everything else? No, it would be judgment that would determine how much the worker would partake in the profit in labor and leisure. And upon who’s judgment were they to rely, if not the workers?

Mr. THOMPSON. Mr. Brandeis, I would like to ask whether in your study of this subject you have placed or fixed any time at which labor should cooperate with the employer as to the setting of a time standard and the initiation of a standard?

Mr. BRANDEIS. Yes – all the time … It seems to me it should begin at the time when the plans are being made to introduce the system.

Mr. THOMPSON. Some of the advocates of scientific management, Mr. Brandeis, who have appeared here as witnesses before the commission, while agreeing to the proposition that it would perhaps be beneficial for labor to cooperate or have a voice in cooperating with the employer in the running of the system, felt that at the introduction there should be no cooperation ; that there is so much difficulty in the selection of the system and in the installation of it, that the added element of labor would make it impossible. Do you so conceive it?

Mr. BRANDEIS. I should say quite the contrary. It seems to me that the elements of difficulty in introduction are largely due to the fact that there is hostility. to the introduction, and that if organized labor or the representatives of labor should welcome and cooperate in the introduction a greater part of these difficulties would be removed … The whole of the work, it seems to me, would be greatly aided by a spirit of helpfulness instead of the reverse.” Pg. 992, 993, Report of Commission on Industrial Relations.                                                            ‘DEFENSE IN THE FIELD BEGINS IN THE FACTORY’ 

 “Mr. THOMPSON. Mr. Brandeis, some of the representatives of organized labor who have appeared here to testify have concurred in the idea of scientific management which you have elaborated. That is to say, if by studies and by analysis and selection better methods for doing the work could be brought about which would be beneficial to the community and to the worker as well as to the employer, it was a good thing. But they have objected to the stopwatch method of making time studies. People who have represented systems, such as Mr. Taylor and others, have said that the stop-watch method of making time studies is one of the first laws of scientific management. In your opinion, what reasonable objection can there be to the introduction of the stop-watch method of making time studies?

Mr. BRANDEIS. It seems to me there can be no objection except the one as to the way in which it is introduced … But if it is done in the right way, the stop watch can not, it seems to me, be objected to by labor, because it is the greatest possible protection to labor … What labor has suffered from in the past and is constantly suffering from now is the ignoring of facts … There is nothing, as I view it, in the situation, the whole social industrial structure, that labor wants so much as knowledge. It wants not only to know itself but it wants others to know it ; and any means that may be adopted, whether it be the stop watch or the photograph or any other means, that could absolutely establish the fact as to what is being done, how long it takes to do it, what the unit is of doing the particular thing — all those are in the interest of labor, because they are in the interest of truth.”

Mr. THOMPSON. In your study of this subject have you considered ways and means? In other words, have you considered the kind of machinery that might be used in the cooperation of the employer and employee in putting into operation their joint cooperation in the introduction of this system?

Mr. BRANDEIS. Not machinery — and I doubt very much whether there is any machinery, except the tactful and sympathetic man, some one’ who realizes, in the first place, that the greatest gain we are to get from scientific management is advancing the interests of the workingman, and who, recognizing that as a fact, has the tact to bring the workingman and his employer together in the adoption of the means by which the various steps should be taken.

Mr. THOMPSON. Have you considered whether or not it is feasible at the beginning for a representative of the workers and the firm to have a joint voice in the selection of the expert who shall install a system, or would that be impracticable?

Mr. BRANDEIS. Certainly.

Mr. THOMPSON. In such a selection, Mr. Brandeis, of the kind of man you mention, a tactful, diplomatic man, he would then be in a sense the instrument or medium by which this principle of cooperation in scientific management might be brought about?

Mr. BRANDEIS. Certainly.

The following, a conversation between the chairman, Frank Walsh and Mr. A Rosenberg.

Testimony of Mr. Rosenberg, New York City, January 15, 1914, Volume 2.

The CHAIRMAN. How has it [the protocol of peace] affected the shop’s work?

Mr. ROSENBERG. After the signing of the protocol?

The CHAIRMAN. Yes, compared with what it was before?

Mr. ROSENBERG – … the agreement says explicitly there shall be no strikes and lockout, and possibly during that time we had a few misunderstandings with shops which did not call strikes, but a stoppage of work; but those stoppages of work have never been ordered by the union or by any official of the union … those stoppages of work have always been ended by the union, as far as my knowledge goes. Of course, in many cases stoppages are avoided for more than an hour or two. To my memory we had only serious stoppages of work where the union had all sorts of trouble before sending the people back to work, in possibly half a dozen shops; those stoppages in half a dozen shops lasted for a day, or possibly two days, or say a week. Even in the independent shops — with those shops we do not have any individual agreement with — we have very few strikes, because the union, as well as the employers, are always trying to get together on some basis to prevent strikes. In other words, as far as strikes are concerned, I believe for the last three years and a half they have been out of existence.

The CHAIRMAN. What has been the result of your adjustment of grievances under this protocol?

Mr. ROSENBERG. We will come to that … For the first couple of months we had no machinery, and we did not know how to set about it. The protocol provided for a board of grievances; the board of grievances was composed of 5 representatives of the union and 5 representatives of the manufacturers’ association; those 10 people used to come together whenever there was any grievance, and we tried to adjust them in the best way we knew how and with the best machinery we had at our disposal. On many occasions, when it was necessary to make an investigation, the board of grievances used to employ one representative of the employers and one representative of the union, and those two used to go up to the shop and investigate, and if they could adjust they did adjust it, and if they could not they brought it to the grievance board, to the board of the grievance committee, and the grievance board acted on the merits of the case, and some decision was made somewhere. But that arrangement was not satisfactory. The board of grievances offhand could not handle so many cases as they had on hand, so there was a whole lot of friction and trouble in the shops, and we finally called upon the board of arbitration to devise ways and means how to adjust grievances in the future quicker than they had been doing, and the board of arbitration got together.

Mr. ROSENBERG … the board of arbitration decided to establish a system of clerks, deputy clerks, and whenever each side should have a sufficient number of complaints, one clerk and one general clerk — the general clerk should appoint the number of deputy clerks, as many as the occasion required; and so they did. That was understood — that whenever the two clerks, one clerk representing the association and the other clerk representing the union, go upon a case and make an investigation, if those two clerks agreed upon some proposition how this case should be disposed of, it is final, and each side must obey the order of the clerks — the manufacturer as well as the union must obey the order of the clerks.

But whenever those two deputy clerks disagreed and could not come to a conclusion, then It was submitted to chief clerks on each side ; each side has a so-called chief clerk — the manufacturers’ association employed one and the union employed one … But whenever those two chief clerks disagreed on a case, then it was brought before the board of grievances, and the board of grievances, sitting as a court, used to hear the case; and whenever necessary they called witnesses to testify, and it was the custom that each side had an equal number of members on that grievance committee, so it required one of each side to decide the case one way or the other; for instance, if the union had a complaint against a certain manufacturer, it required one manufacturer to vote with us; and, on the other hand, whenever the manufacturers brought up one…

The Protocol of Peace

“Industrial Democracy provides an important lens through which to view IR during the Progressive Era. Industrial democracy was one of the handful of ideas that defined Progressive Era reformers. It signaled a new scientific approach to labor in America as well as a fundamental recommitment to democratic principles.” pg. 23, Triangle Shirtwaist, the Protocols of Peace, and Industrial Democracy in Progressive Era New York, Richard A. Greenwald.

“It was the purpose of the Protocol to introduce into the relations of the employer and the employee a whole new element; that is the element of industrial democracy.” Louis Brandeis.

Brandeis was foremost among all in the creation of the Protocol of Peace and it was largely through his efforts that the strike was ended on September 2, 1910. The Protocol provided legislation for a 50 hour, 6 day work week, 10 paid legal holidays a year, time-and-a-half for overtime, an increase in the minimum wage, a regular and prompt cash pay-day, all in shop subcontracting abolished, but most importantly, the agreement was the official acceptance of the union shop. “Each member of the Manufacturers is to maintain a union shop”, and when hiring, “union men are preferred”, and health care only for union men, “the Manufacturers declare their belief in the Union”.  The union as the scientific expert, an absolute necessity for the future international system they would begin constructing a mere two years later under Woodrow Wilson. The alignment first of America, to be compatible, or compliant to the future model of collectivism (globalism or internationalism) a must, a prerequisite to everything. But that story concludes this series, so much more on that later.

One notes how the Protocol is “an arrangement entered into” between the “CLOAK, SUIT AND SKIRT MANUFACTURERS’ PROTECTIVE ASSOCIATION, hereinafter called the Manufacturer”, and the “INTERNATIONAL LADIES’ GARMENT WORKERS’ UNION.” The workers here not named, only their representative, the union. Note the lack of presence throughout the entire process of the actual worker. The entire system built upon the back of labour yet where is his voice being heard? Certainly not in the testimony of Brandeis or his industrial friends.

Brandeis named chairman of the Arbitration Board to enforce the Protocol, Brandeis having final say in all grievance settlements. He holds the tiebreaker.

CLOAK STRIKE ENDS; AGREEMENT SIGNED; Men Win All Their Demands Except That for the “Closed Shop.” New York Times, September 3, 1910: “The strike of 70,000 cloakmakers which began early in last July ended yesterday with the acceptance by both the strikers and the employers of a peace protocol, based principally upon the agreement suggested by Louis D. Brandeis of Boston in the last days of July, when he conducted a Series of conferences between employers and strikers.”

“SHIFF COMMITTEE STOPS LABOR WAR; Cloak Manufacturers Agree to Its Proposal to Arbitrate Differences with union. SETTLEMENT NOW IN SIGHT 50,000 Workers Were Ready to Strike – Brandeis or Mayor Mitchel May Head Board.” July 3, 1915

 “In New York City’s garment industry, reformers found what was arguably the nation’s most primitive industry. Cutthroat competition, layers of subcontracting, and a poorly paid mass of immigrant workers, among other things, locked garment manufacturing in a nineteenthcentury production model. It therefore offered a perfect laboratory for people such as Louis Brandeis. The ladies’ garment industry had an established, but weak, new union. It had a core of willing industrial democrats within the industry led by Julius Henry Cohen, a noted corporate lawyer. The result, Brandeis’s creation, the Protocol of Peace, was one of the most significant labor-management cooperation schemes of the Pre-New Deal Era. So impressive was the Protocol that when the Wilson Administration created the U.S. Commission on Industrial Relations in 1913, Brandeis was the president’s first choice to chair it4 New York also was the site of the terrible Triangle Factory Fire of March 25, 1911, when 146 mainly young, immigrant women garment workers died. The fire sparked a reform effort that in four years remade New York into the model of a progressive state.” pg. 14, Triangle Shirt Waist.

“The father of the Protocol, Louis Brandeis came to the labor question in 1892.”

“In 1910, while New York was in the heat of the second in a series of general strikes in the garment industry, Brandeis came to the city to bring labor and management together in a novel agreement that became known as the Protocol of Peace.” Pg. 16, Triangle Shirt Waist.

“They decided that if ‘a big man’ made a call for a settlement conference, and if the union and Cohen could set certain preconditions, talks could begin. It was clear to all concerned that they meant a big Jewish man. Both sides were concerned that ‘their’ matters be settled within their community. They did not want an outsider meddling in their affairs. In a July 21 letter to Louis Brandeis, Bloomfield explained how he laid the foundations for talks:

‘there was only one open door – to take a big man like Brandeis and empower him … to confer with both sides and draw up a fair basis of negotiations. Both responded heartily and suggested that I invite Mr. B. and come with him for a private talk’ … That initial meeting set in motion a process that eventually led to the Protocol. On July 22, Brandeis left for New York, taking with him a draft of a proposed labor agreement … After a preliminary meeting between the principal negotiators, Meyer London, noted socialist lawyer who advised the union, and Cohen, a later conference was scheduled with Brandeis as chair. At this first meeting were ten representatives from each side plus Brandeis and his staff. In writing about this meeting, McClure’s Magazine’s Edith Wyatt was struck by similarities on both sides. Both groups were almost identical. They were overwhelmingly Jewish. The union delegation included middle-aged unionists, radical workers, East Side intellectuals, and socialists. And, so did the management group. The mood at that first meeting was hopeful, according to McClure’s. Samuel Gompers, President of the American Federation of Labor (AFL), who was an observer at the first meeting was so confident that he returned to Washington on the 29th, telling the New York Times he was sure “that the garment workers’ strike would be settled speedily.” Brandeis set the mood for the conference. He told the twenty men assembled that they were witnessing an important moment in history, the birth of a new system of industrial relations. They would help shape the future:

“Gentlemen,” Brandeis stated “we have come together in a matter which we must all recognize is very serious, and an important business, not only to settle this strike, but to create a relation which will prevent similar strikes in the future. That work is one which it seems to me is approached in a spirit which makes the situation a very hopeful one and I am sure from my conferences with council of both parties, and with individual members whom they represent, that those who are here are all here with that desire. It seems to me … that aid could be effectively and properly given by providing that the manufacturers should, in the employment of labor hereafter, give the preference to union men, where the union men are equal in efficiency to any non-union applicants …” Brandeis opening remarks, Mason, 1946, pp 296, 297.

Brandeis Part 4: Dispensationalism and the Social Gospel

“Socialism offered not only a radical critique of American political and economic institutions; it also offered the seal, symbols, and sense of participation in a world-transforming cause often associated with Christianity itself.” The Social Gospel and Socialism: A Comparison of the Thought of Francis Greenwood Peabody, Washington Gladden, and Walter Rauschenbusch, by Jacob H. Dorn (1)

Blackstone and the Dispensationalists

William Eugene Blackstone was a very well-known evangelical minister of his day, considered today a founder of Dispensationalism along with John Nelson Darby and the Plymouth Brethren in the mid 1800’s. Other key names in the foundation of Dispensationalism in America are James Inglis, James Hall Brookes, C. I Scofield, and Dwight L. Moody. Christian Dispensationalists interpret the Bible literally, believing in an approaching cataclysmic event as described in the Book of Revelations.

From out of this group is where they popularized a fear of the future found in the biblical stories of the tribulation, the rapture, millennialism, otherwise known as the second coming of Christ. The movement has also greatly assisted in the creation of a Jewish homeland in Palestine in that it is primarily centered around the return of God’s chosen people to Israel.

These concepts much to our surprise weren’t established tens of thousands of years ago but a little more than one hundred years before I was born. These men were instrumental in spreading the gospel of a future end times where world wars and social upheavals would lead to a new world order, a new kingdom of God, a heaven on earth. 

Dwight Lyman Moody was the most popular evangelical of the day and is considered the predecessor to televangelism and the likes of Billy Graham, Jimmy Swaggart, Jerry Falwell, Jim Bakker, Joel Osteen, and Oral Roberts. The Moody Bible Institute of Chicago was the inspired model for many Bible Colleges around America forming a network and helping propagate faith in a literal translation of the Bible. These men all having one thing in common even today in that they all preach end times through a literal translation of the Bible and support the followers of Judaism as God’s chosen people and support emphatically their right to a homeland in Palestine.

John Nelson Darby is considered the father of dispensationalism, futurism, and pre-millennial tribulation rapture and was much older than the rest, born in 1800. Darby was a pioneer within the Plymouth Brethren and founder of the Exclusive Brethren. The Brethren a network of like-minded Protestant churches. Darby promoted sola scriptura, common to nearly all Protestant denominations, believing the word of the Bible as the one true infallible authority. Darby’s eschatology was then popularized through the publication of the Scofield Reference Bible in 1909. Today, thanks to Darby and C.I. Scofield we have well over one hundred million American Christians interpreting the Bible literally, fearing the future and believing it is all in God’s hands.

James H. Brookes studied briefly at the Princeton Seminary before moving to Miami University at Oxford Ohio. He was the driving force behind the Niagara Bible Conferences (1875-1897) that introduced Protestants from all over to the fundamental ideas of dispensationalism including the restoration of Israel and a distinction between the saved and the damned.

William Eugene Blackstone,

Dwight Lyman Moody.
John Nelson Darby
James Hall Brookes

Cyrus Ingerson Scofield was a Southern Presbyterian and very influential author of the first modern Bible with “chain references”, The Scofield Reference/Study Bible. Published in 1909, (the same year as Herbert Croly’s Promise of American Life), it was to be the first definitive, scientific interpretation of the word of God, complete with commentary and explanatory notes written in the margins, by Scofield and his team of Consulting Editors (Barrellet, Sayce and Maroliouth of Oxford, Weston, Gray, Erdman of Princeton, Pierson, Moorehead, Harris, Gaebelein, Pettingill). In 1917 it was revised by Scofield in an attempt to attribute exact dates to biblical verse.

“This edition of the Bible had its origin in the increasing conviction of the Editor through thirty years’ study and use of the Scriptures as pastor, teacher, writer, and lecturer upon biblical themes, that all of the many excellent and useful editions of the Word of God left much to be desired.” iii, Introduction

Scofield’s version, containing the entire text of the King James version originally published in 1611, becomes the modern day theological entering wedge, acting as the ultimate authority, impressing both a sense of fear of the future and a state of helplessness into its hundreds of millions of followers.  Scofield an early proponent of gap theory and progressive creationism, the belief in a gradual “unfolding” of life as determined by God, a recognition of intelligent design, and gap theory, a new beginning put between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2. Gap theory as advocated by Scofield expands Biblical history to millions of years rather than the previously taught thousands of years. A theistic evolution opening the door to Darwinism.

“The Bible is a progressive unfolding of truth.” v, Introduction (emphasis not added)

On page 2 of the 100th Anniversary Edition of the 1917 Scofield Bible, Scofield states the Pentateuch (otherwise known as the Torah), tells “undeniably the order of the experience of the people of God in all ages”, a “revelation of the true history,” and such a history “we find in words of matchless grandeur, and in an order which, rightly understood, is absolutely scientific. In the Pentateuch, therefore, we have a true and logical introduction to the entire Bible.” (emphasis added)

One further note: Woodrow Wilson’s father created the Southern Presbyterian Church and served as its leader for nearly forty years. He was central in organizing the break up of the Presbyterian Church into a north and south.

Cyrus Ingerson Scofield

Also in 1909, Harvard University president Charles W. Eliot (author of the New Education), lectures to the Harvard Summer School of Theology speaking repeatedly of “a new Bible” … “resulting from historical study of its books in the light of recent researches and of new knowledge of the development of the world and mankind.” Eliot stating the importance of this “new religion” in outlining the intellectual progress of the last century.

“The religion of a multitude of humane persons in the twentieth century may, therefore, be called without inexcusable exaggeration a ‘new religion’ – not that a single one of its doctrines and practices is really new in essence, but only that the wider acceptance and better actual application of truths … on a large scale, are new.” pg. 430, The Congregationalist and Christian World, Event and Comment, President Eliot’s New Religion; see also, Harvard Theological Review October 1909.

Today dispensationalism has morphed into a Progressive version that differs slightly from the classic dispensationalists, although the main adherents are still widely shared including: a separation between the fates of the Christian Church and that of Israel, a future pre-tribulation rapture and an eventual kingdom of peace lasting for a thousand years. Sounding very much like the vision promised by utopian, ethical socialists, and almost verbatim to Marx’s own theory of our future and future perfect promised by the technocrats.

Blackstone wrote the very popular, Jesus is Coming: God’s Hope for a Restless World, in 1878 and it became a sort of manifesto for all dispensationalist thought. The book was the movements first bestseller, selling millions of copies over the next fifty years and has been translated into over 40 other languages.

Blackstone travelled to Palestine in 1890-1891 and witnessed Leon Pinsker’s new movement, a Rothschild sponsored development programme of agricultural communities in Rishon LeZion and Nahalat Yehudah. It was during this visit Blackstone had the idea of organizing the first conference between Christian and Jews. Historians regard the Conference of Christians and Jews on the Past, Present , and Future of Israel to be the first interfaith conference between Christians nad Jews held in the United States.

In 1891 Blackstone famously published the Blackstone Memorial Petition in response to what he witnessed in Palestine.  The petition was presented to US President Benjamin Harrison, in an effort to gain American support for the Jewish situation in central Europe and “to secure the holding, at an early date, of an international conference to consider the condition of the Israelites and their claims to Palestine as their ancient home”. (41)

This is a full five years before Theodore Herzl’s Der Judenstaat, and six years before Herzl is named president of the Zionist Organization at the First Zionist Congress in Basel. Harrison acknowledged Blackstone and the memorial but chose not to involve himself and there the petition remained until it was revived by Louis Brandeis in 1916.

Introduced to the petition through his personal confidente Nathan Strauss, Louis Brandeis would then formulate a plan to have the petition presented to Woodrow Wilson and was adamant that he wasn’t mentioned at all. By influencing Wilson strictly from the perspective of a fellow Christian, Brandeis hoped Blackstone’s appeal for Jewish aid would hold more wait with the devoutly Presbyterian Wilson.

Blackstone had sent letters to Wilson as early as November 4th 1914 asking for his assistance in “the coming redemption of Israel”.  He attached a copy of Jesus is Coming.

On November 10th, Wilson thanked Blackstone for his book through his personal secretary, Joseph Tumulty.

On April 5th, 1916, Blackstone sent Wilson his brochure, The Times of the Gentiles and the War in the Light of Prophecy, in which he predicted a return of the Jews to Palestine in 1917 or 1918. (78)

A letter from Nathan Straus to W. E. B. dated May 8, 1916 reads: “It would have done your heart good to have heard (Mr. Brandeis) assert what a valuable contribution to the cause your document is. In fact he agrees with me that you are the Father of Zionism, as your work antedates Herzl.”

Wilson was presented with the 1916 Blackstone Memorial on May 5, 1916, attached was the original Memorial with its 413 signatures. The petition is signed by John D. Rockefeller, William Rockefeller, J. Pierpont Morgan, Russell Sage (Skull and Bones), Chauncey Depew, and nearly four hundred others.

“The principles laid out by Blackstone were remarkably similar to those of the Balfour Declaration and League of Nation’s Mandate for Palestine three decades later. This is why Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis, leader of the American Zionist Movement, asked William Blackstone to reissue his Memorial Petition in 1916, believing it incorporated the principles upon which a just and humanitarian Jewish homeland movement could be founded. Brandeis believed that Blackstone’s Petition, ‘ante-dating as it did Theodore Herzl’s own participation in the Zionist movement, [was] destined to become of historical significance’ and called Blackstone ‘the true founder of Zionism’.” (40)

Stephen S. Wise, one of Brandeis’ inner core lieutenants communicated often with Blackstone on several matters concerning the Jew. Wise the Rabbi of the Free Synagogue in New York was an original member and vice-chairman of Brandeis’, Provisional Executive Committee for General Zionist.

“May 22, 1916 My Dear Mr. Blackstone: I am very glad to know from your letter of the 15th of the Memorial which you are preparing to present to President Wilson, reviving the Memorial which you presented to President Harrison twenty-five years ago. That document, ante-dating as it did Theodore Herzl’s own participation in the Zionist movement, is destined to become of historical significance: and I trust that you may be as successful in securing support for this new Memorial as you were a quarter of a century ago. In view of the work being directly undertaken by the Jewish Zionist organization, your memorial would presumably be most effective if it derives its support from non-Jews. I hope you will keep me fully informed of the progress that you are making, and will advise me in advance when you are purposing to present the Memorial, so that we may give such aid as may be possible in rendering it effective. With best wishes, Very cordially yours, Louis D. Brandeis.” (75)

Brandeis had Blackstone address the Zionist General Congress in Philadelphia (July 2nd – 5th, 1916). Blackstone spoke in front of four thousand at the Metropolitan Opera House. Brandeis introduced Blackstone as “the most important ally Zionism has outside of its own ranks.” (77)

“William Blackstone made a central contribution to American evangelical Judeo-centrism by offering a nationalist adaptation of Darby’s premillennial dispensationalism. Blackstone crafted a middle path between futurist and historicist prophecy interpretation. His efforts to shape political discourse generated a great deal of intra-Jewish debate.” (74)

There are within the Brandeis papers 47 pages of personal documents regarding the Blackstone Memorial Petition.

Today Blackstone, like the rest of the dispensationalists, occupy an obscure area of history seldom considered. Blackstone helped found Biola University in Los Angeles and was its very first Dean, yet in 2013, during a commemoration of another Biola founder, Reuben A. Torrey, where a bronze plaque was presented upon which it stated Torrey, and not Blackstone, was the first Dean of Biola. Blackstone seemingly erased from the history of the very university he helped found. As of 2015 they’ve named a students residence after him and on the website they do finally acknowledge Blackstone’s importance to the university as it’s first Dean.

“Unfortunately, the plaque included the statement “Biola’s first Dean.” At the time, many old-timers commented, “That’s not correct, William Blackstone was the first dean!” Written communication subsequently corrected this error, but the bronze plaque remains unaltered. Thus, nearly everyone today is unaware that William Blackstone, not R.A. Torrey, was Biola’s first dean.” (73)

The Social Gospel Movement

“The name of Walter Rauschenbusch is synonymous with the Social Gospel.”

“Socialism offered not only a radical critique of American political and economic institutions; it also offered the seal, symbols, and sense of participation in a world-transforming cause often associated with Christianity itself.” The Social Gospel and Socialism: A Comparison of the Thought of Francis Greenwood Peabody, Washington Gladden, and Walter Rauschenbusch, Jacob H. Dorn (1)

Walter Rauschenbusch was born in Rochester New York in 1861 to Karl Augustus Heinrich Rauschenbusch and Caroline Rump. Walter’s father a German Lutheran turned Baptist clergyman, arriving in the US in 1846 after studying at Berlin and Bonn universities. Once arriving in New York he entered the Baptist communion, and in 1858 was head of the German department of the Rochester Theological Seminary where he would remain for thirty years.

Following high school Walter travelled to Germany with his father where he studied for four years (1878-1883) at an Evangelical German prep school in Gutersloh and Berlin University, near where his father was born, and upon returning to the United States, would follow his father to the Rochester Theological Seminary, where he gained a doctorate in divinity in 1886. Walter, the sixth in a succession of ministers, began his pastorate at the Second German Baptist Church in Hell’s Kitchen New York. (3)

Rauschenbusch felt it the responsibility of the Church to improve the deplorable urban conditions in the tenements brought on by industrialization, and along with several others, founded the entire Social Gospel movement through the creation of The Brotherhood of the Kingdom. The Social Gospel movement “was an outgrowth of Christian Socialism” and Christian Socialism a “new religion” first put forth by utopian socialist Henri de Saint-Simon to serve as an authority over the realm of industry and trade.

The Brotherhood of the Kingdom movement started by Rauschenbusch representing to the Christian denominations, what Walter Lippmann proposed to the secular as the Great Society. Christian Socialism looking very much like the religious complement to Progressivism. Brandeis’ daughter Elizabeth married Rauschenbusch’s son Paul in 1925.

Walter Rauschenbusch

August Heinrich Rauschenbusch. One of the earliest Baptist leaders in North America. “No one man exerted a larger influence on the life of our churches than he did through his classroom, preaching, newspaper writing, and books.” (1)

Rauschenbusch’s own shortly lived periodical magazine, For the Right, was created “in the interests of the working people”. “For the Right set out the Declaration of Principles for the Christian Socialist Society of New York City.” Rauschenbusch’s stated goal was, “To apply the ethical principles of Jesus Christ so that our industrial relationships may be humanized, our economic system be moralized – we band together as Christian Socialists.” Pg. 91, Walter Rauschenbusch by Dores Robinson Sharpe.

Rauschenbusch much like Brandeis was bringing together capital and labour. The Social Gospel movement an extension of the efficiency movement Brandeis was spearheading at the same time. Just as the Taylor Society was preaching ‘scientific management’ of society, so too were the leaders of the Social Gospel.

“The Christian socialism that Rauschenbusch embraced stood aloof not only from Marxian doctrine, but also from any socialist party. We are concerned with principles, not with methods … We are evolutionists, not revolutionists … In this sense we are Socialist, Socialist in the spirit rather than the letter.” pg. 91, Walter Rauschenbusch, Dores Sharpe.

“The motivation for this distinctly religious movement was supplied chiefly by the ethical impulses flowing from a progressive theology. Of the many perplexing issues growing out of industrialism those that concerned the relations of labor and capital and their interpretation by socialism so largely dominated the interests of socially minded clergymen in this decade that the social gospel may without question be described historically as the response of Protestantism to those specific situations. The centrality of the labor problem in all realistic discussions of urban religious conditions adds further weight to this definition. The problems of an industrial civilization remained the central interest of social Christianity.” Pg. 117, Rise of Social Gospel Within American Protestantism.

Francis Greenwood Peabody, professor of ethics and theology at Harvard from 1880 until his retirement in 1913, the Unitarian studied at Heidelberg, and then Leipzig and Halle universities.

Charles Richmond Henderson, Baptist minister, BA and MA, Bachelor of Divinity. In 1892, he was asked by William Rainey Harper, president of University of Chicago, a devout Baptist himself, to join the newly formed faculty of “social science” at the University of Chicago as a professor of sociology. This the first independent sociology department in the United States founded the same year Henderson arrived by Albion Woodbury Small. Small one of the very founders of sociology also studied at Leipzig and Berlin and then Johns Hopkins before moving to Chicago University, but more on him in Brandeis Part 6: The Science and Philosophy of Law. Henderson a member of the American Economic Association and the American Academy of Political and Social Science.

William Rainey Harper also a Professor of Semitic Languages at Yale in 1886, and named Woolsey Professorship of Biblical Literature in 1889, “principal of the Chautauqua College of Liberal Arts and later of the entire Chautauqua movement.” He was a key member of the organizational committee that created the University of Chicago, and was elected its first president. The American Baptist Education Society donated $400,000 to the university’s founding, and John D. Rockefeller donated $600,000. The land was donated by Jekyll Island Club member Marshall Field.(2)

Washington Gladden, pastor of the First Congregational Church of Columbus, Ohio. Pragmatist.

William Newton Clark also an ordained Baptist minister (1856). He received a BA (1861) and BD (1863) at Colgate Seminary (Hamilton Theological Seminary), lectured at Johns Hopkins (1899), Oberlin (1901), Harvard (1903), and Yale (1905). He wrote, An Outline of Christian Theology: For the Use of Students in Hamilton Theological Seminary in 1894, which was then  published in 1898 by Charles Scribner’s Sons. In 1903 he wrote Huxley and Phillips Brooks.

Samuel Zane Batten wrote, The New Citizenship, and The New World Order. Established the Commission on Social Service of the American Baptist Association.

Francis Greenwood Peabody
Charles Richmond Henderson

Samuel Zane Batten

William Newton Clark
Thomas Nixon Carver

“Salvation was expressed in social-ethical terms by these leaders of Protestant social thought … A social salvation was really included within the broad universalism of the kingdom of heaven on earth, a conception now beginning to emerge definitely as the ideal of a perfected human society.” Pg. 109 Rise of Social Gospel Within the American Protestantism.

Thomas Nixon Carver studying under Richard T. Ely and John Bates Clark at Johns Hopkins. Making him a disciple of Knies and the German Historical School. Carver the treasurer secretary of the American Economic Association. Ely a world-renowned economist, founder and first secretary of the American Economic Association, and leader of the Progressive movement. Ely also just happens to be the founder of the Christian Social Union and wrote extensively on organized labour movements. His father a devout Presbyterian. Both Ely and Clark studying directly under Karl Knies at the University of Heidelberg. Ely also studying under Johann Kaspar Bluntschli, the man who created one of the first codes of international law and war and is a cofounder of the Institute of International Law. Bluntschli heavily influenced by Hegelian ethical social theory we see popularized in both Germany and the United States.

“Professor Ely, who was perhaps the leading spirit in the group, found generous support for his new historical school of economics among the clergy who as we know had joined the ‘revolt against laissez-faire theory’ – in which attitude the Association found its chief raison d’etre.” Pg. 116, The Rise of the Social Gospel Within American Protestantism, Hopkins.

“the expert, the social scientist in the middle, emerges in much of Henderson’s work as the arbiter of social life.” Pg. , Social Science History, Volume 34, No. 3, pg. 337-371, Pragmatic Sociology and the Public Sphere, The Case of Charles Richmond Henderson, Andrew Abbott.

“He [Charles Richmond Henderson] closed Citizens in Industry with a note that churches – like the great trusts – were amalgamating and that Protestant ecumenical was beginning to echo Roman Catholicism, which he called “an international trust of religious forces.” Pg. , Social Science History, Volume 34, No. 3, pg. 337-371, Pragmatic Sociology and the Public Sphere, The Case of Charles Richmond Henderson, Andrew Abbott.

“A ‘social policy’ implies and assumes a certain philosophy of life and … a certain religious faith. This faith proves its worth and reasonableness by its works. It is living and it is prophetic and creative. To us who believe in a progressive social policy, the world is not merely pushed forward by blind physical forces; it moves onward toward aims clearly set before the human will and realized gradually by concerted labours directed by science. This policy is, root and branch, ethical; it is morality organized, vivified, guided by growing knowledge, and inspired by faith.” Pg. 15, Programmes in Economic Facts and In Ideals.

 “in late nineteenth century America the new science of sociology … suddenly found itself the handmaiden and ready instrument of a somewhat distinct strain of ideas; ideas which, begin religious and to an extent liberally progressive, were acceptable to the entrenched powers of university governors and presidents.” Pg. 42, The Development of Sociology and the Social Gospel in America, J. Graham Morgan, Sociological Analysis Volume 30, No. 1 (Spring 1969). Pp. 42-53.

“it is virtually impossible to extricate sociology and the Social Gospel in many instances, and to a large extent sociology in America may be seen as an outgrowth of the Social Gospel.” Pg. 42, The Development of Sociology and the Social Gospel in America.

The fellowship’s wide range of interests was well exemplified in the program for the conference of 1898, at which three series of papers were presented. “The Prophets of Israel as Social Leaders,” “The Rural Population and the Social Movement,” trade unions in New York, the social work of the church, a review of Sidney and Beatrice Webb’s Industrial Democracy” pg. 7 Walter Rauschenbusch and the Brotherhood of the Kingdom, C. Howard Hopkins, Mount Hermon School, Mount Hermon, Mass.

“No aspect of the thought of social gospellers as a whole more effectively describes them as children of their age than does the word ‘progressive. Applied first to advancing theological views, … ‘progressive’ later became a political catch-word representative of a particular reform philosophy popularized by Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson. That the kingdom should be progressively realized – by evolution – indicates the close relation of social gospel thought to the intellectual and social ideology of the times.” Pg. 150, Church History, Vol. 7, No. 2 (June, 1938) pp. 138-156; see also pg. 13, Walter Rauschenbausch and the Brotherhood of the Kingdom; see also Batten, op. cit., pp. 129-130.

“But by all odds the most important writings by members of the Brotherhood were those of Walter Rauschenbusch, whose epochal book, Christianity and the Social Crisis, appearing in 1907, made its author at once the acknowledged leader of the American social Christianity and soon acquainted the Protestant world with the basic tenets for which the Brotherhood had long labored.” Pg. 153, Walter Rauschenbusch and the Brotherhood of the Kingdom.

A Theology for the Social Gospel, regarded by many as his greatest, set the doctrine of the kingdom of God at the heart of social Christianity.” Pg. 156, Walter Rauschenbusch and the Brotherhood of the Kingdom.

Walter’s son Paul Arthur Raushenbush would marry Louis D. Brandeis’ daughter Elizabeth in 1925 and boxes of correspondence between the three found at the Wisconsin Historical Society within the UW Madison digital archives indicate quite clearly that the same interests in labour, social justice, and reform that stirred Louis in the first third of the 20th century also stirred his daughter and son-in-law. The “husband and wife team of economists … best known for their work with Harold Groves … developing and securing the passage of Wisconsin’s unemployment compensation legislation, the first such legislation in the nation.” (4)

A rich collection of communication exists in those archives between Paul and Felix Frankfurter, Tom Corcoran, and Thomas H. Eliot and other federal officials that shows an important involvement within Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s brain trust. Brandeis and Frankfurter most influential here again, consulting and advising US presidents in the completion of much of the work started under Woodrow Wilson.

Your content goes here. Edit or remove this text inline or in the module Content settings. You can also style every aspect of this content in the module Design settings and even apply custom CSS to this text in the module Advanced settings.

Brandeis Part 3: American Zionism and the Making of Israel

Brandeis Part 3: American Zionism and the Making of Israel

Brandeis and the American Zionist Movement

“A nonpracticing Jew who did not believe in religion, he became head of the American Zionist movement in his sixth decade and transformed it from a moribund sideshow into a powerful component of American Jewish life.” (1)

Brandeis met with Woodrow Wilson for the very first time on August 28, 1912, at Sea Girt, New Jersey, to discuss Brandeis’ reform ideas. meaning Brandeis met both Wilson and de Haas in the same month just prior to Wilson’s election to president. Seemingly coordinated, both the rise of Wilson to the White House and Brandeis to the head of the Zionist Organization of America. DeHaas proves to be a very able director and executive secretary for Brandeis interests moving forward.

Brandeis’ sudden interest in Zionism, according to the mainstream, was sparked by his first meeting with Jacob DeHaas August 13, 1912. DeHaas was personal secretary to the man mainstream will tell you is the father of Zionism, Theodor Herzl. DeHaas moving to America on Herzl’s suggestion, eventually settling in Boston near Brandeis around 1902.

And while it is true that De Haas, the editor of the Boston Jewish Advocate and the Boston Jewish Chronicle newspapers, did inspire Brandeis with heroing tales of both Louis’ Zionist uncle (Lewis Naphtali Dembitz) and Theodore Herzl, Brandeis had long before been introduced to the Jewish problem. As early as November 28th 1905, five years before his meeting with DeHaas, we see Brandeis expressing sympathy for Zionism in a speech he made at the New Century Club in Boston commemorating the 250th anniversary of Jewish settlement entitled What Loyalty Demands. (2)  

Brandeis had also publicly announced his sympathy for Zionism at least two years prior to his train station conversation with deHaas, in an interview with The American Hebrew on December 2, 1910, and a similar one on December 9 in DeHaas’ the Jewish Chronicle, and when asked whether he had interest in those working for a Jewish revival in Palestine, Brandeis replied, “I have a great deal of sympathy with the Zionists. The movement is an exceedingly deserving one. These so-called dreamers are entitled to the respect and appreciation of the entire Jewish people.” (3)

Brandeis joined the Federation of American Zionism and it’s also here during this time, while he was nearing his sixties, that Brandeis changes his middle name, in honour of his Zionist uncle, from David to Dembitz.


Jacob DeHaas

Rabbi Stephen Samuel Wise

On July 18, 1913 Brandeis joined the executive committee August 30, 1914, Brandeis was elected chairman of the Provisional Executive Committee for General Zionist Affairs, once again finding himself, as if by divine intervention, the face of yet another movement, this time American Zionism. 1914 also the year Brandeis leads the Zionist Organization of America. In March of 1915, Brandeis, along with Stephen Wise and Julian Mack would establish the Jewish Congress Organization Committee and in 1917, two months after America enters the First World War, Brandeis was elected honourary chair of the National Executive Committee that was the precursor to the American Jewish Congress.

Brandeis and his lieutenants willingly involved themselves in many other lesser known, but no less important Jewish organizations like the Jewish Agricultural Experiment Station. Brandeis, along with Mack, Marshall, Schiff, and Wise were all members of the Advisory Board of the Hebrew Sheltering and Immigrant Aid Society. To raise funding for the creation of Israel, Brandeis, Bernard Flexner and Robert Szold helped bring together the Palestine Cooperative Company Inc., with the Reconstruction Committee of the American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee to form the Palestine Economic Corporation.

July 10, 1918 meeting of the Joint Distribution Committee and the executives of the American Jewish Relief Committee at 52 William Street, New York. First is the actual photograph, the second a painting commemorating the moment with the key addition of Louis Marshall (behind Warburg) and a globe for some reason now prominently displayed in the immediate foreground. Along with several other alterations. Brandeis resigned from both of these committees by personal letter to Warburg once confirmed as Supreme Court associate justice.

From left to right: Felix M. Warburg, Chairman; Aaron Teitelbaum; Albert Lucas, Secretary; F. Friedman, official stenographer; Boris D. Bogen, Executive Director; Leon J. Sanders; Harry Fischel; Scholem Asch; Alexander Kahn; Jacob Milch; Harriet B. Lowenstein, controller, Moses Schoenberg; M.S. Margolies; Israel Friedlander; Paul Baerwald, Associate Treasurer; Julius Levy; Peter Wiernik; Meyer Gillis; Harry Cutler; Cyrus Adler; Arthur Lehman, Treasurer; Jacob H. Schiff. Standing: A. Zucker; Isidore Hershfield; Meyer Berlin; Stanley Berow; Lewis Topkis; Morris Engelman.

“The JDC distributed tens of millions to the early construction efforts in Palestine through the war time donations of three distinct communities to “supply capital and credit, assuming a credit structure where none had existed before. Its first prospectus stated that the company ‘recognized that the extension of credit facilities was a first vital necessity in Palestine and of the utmost consequence in its economic up building.'”(4)

The American Jewish Committee targeted for funds already settled American Jews while the Central Relief Committee looked to the new Jewish immigrant and the Union of Jewish Orthodox Congregations for funding, and the People’s Relief Committee solicited Jewish Labour and Socialist groups like the Amalgamated Clothing Workers or the Federation of Jewish Farmers etc. (5)

Brandeis created the Palestine Economic Corporation with Bernard Flexner, Julius Simon, Robert Szold, Jacob Schiff, Felix M. Warburg and other wealthy New York German Jews. Within that corporation were formed the necessary institutions and utilities to begin establishing the necessary infrastructure for a working Jewish community in Palestine: the Central Bank of Cooperative Institutions in Palestine Ltd.; the Economic Board for Palestine of London; the Palestine Jewish Colonization Association; and Palestine Mortgage and Credit Bank Ltd. The PEC working in conjunction with both Baron de Rothschild’s PICA and the Jewish Agency constructed modern methods of agriculture at a time when industry was largely non-existent in the area. The PEC grew their “pioneering country, in such fields as credit for agricultural and industrial enterprise, housing provision, town planning, and water supply.” (6)

Through their various subsidiaries the PEC facilitated growth through credit programs, “loans for low-cost housing in rural and urban areas”, the PEC was “deeply involved in questions regarding the country’s water supply” making significant contributions to the supply problem by implementing “improved technical methods, and the establishment of centralized and systematic irrigation plants.” (7)

“The colony had been carefully planned by PICA in cooperation with the Palestine Economic Corporation (PEC) and the Jewish Agency”. pg. 284, Two Rothschilds and the Land of Palestine, Simon Shama

“the historiography of American Zionism until 1930 may well be called ‘Brandeiscentric.’ Brandeis – the man his ideas, and his achievements – are presented as the pinnacle of American Zionist realization during the first part of its history. It is generally accepted that there was no organized Zionism in the United States until Brandeis assumed leadership in 1914 and that his hold on the movement continued at least until the beginning of 1921.” (8)

After being nominated to the US Supreme Court in 1916, Brandeis wrote to Felix Warburg at the New York offices of the American Jewish Relief Committee, “I regret that I feel compelled to resign from the Executive Committee of the American Jewish Relief Committee, and of course also from the Joint Distribution Committee”, to avoid negative public perception yet Brandeis still very much wielded authority from ‘behind-the-scenes’, with an ‘invisible leadership’. (9)

“Through his closest lieutenants, Julian W. Mack, Stephen S. Wise, Bernard Flexner, Jacob de Haas, Felix Frankfurter, and Robert Szold, hereinafter referred to as ‘the Brandeis Group’, this inner ‘hard core’ group were all, “American-educated, a majority being also American-born. All were university educated, most were lawyers, and most of the lawyers had attended Harvard. A majority also became Zionists after 1914.” (10):

Brandeis “stepped down from all of his positions in Zionist and Jewish organizations to avoid embarrassing the Supreme Court, of which he had just become a member. He continued however, to serve in an honorary capacity and henceforward exercised overall authority from behind-the-scenes.” (11)

“As head of the American Zionist movement, Brandeis did not and could not act alone, especially after his nomination to the Supreme Court in 1916, when for technical reasons as well as matters of principle his personal participation in the movement was limited.” (12)

“The Brandeis group led the American Zionist movement and made the major decisions, always in contact with Brandeis.” (13)

“Through his associates, Brandeis held the Zionist organization in a tight grip.” (14)

“From Louis Brandeis around World War I to Abba Hillel Silver after World War II, Zionism has been defined as a form of American liberalism.”(15)

Balfour met with Brandeis on at least two occasions during his Washington visit (May 7th and 11th), and a large stack of contemporary scholarship concurs, as substantiated above by Ben Halpern, professor of Near East Studies at Brandeis University, that these meetings between Brandeis and Balfour were critical, and served as a major coming together of Anglo-American relations. Brandeis and Balfour were careful not to debate first rights to self-determination between the Jew and Arab on numerical grounds, as the Hebrew then, as now, grossly outnumbered in the region by his fellow Arab Semite. This centuries old tradition of calling anyone critical of Israel or Zionism anti-Semitic a tired misnomer in that there are over 70 languages associated on the Semitic branch, the largest spoken language Arabic, Amharic, Tigrinya, and then Hebrew. 

Brandeis also one of the earliest to actively promote dual loyalty between Israel and the United States through a shared nationalism. and was very influential on Balfour, wielding all the authority vested within him Brandeis an essential figure in the conception, promotion, and especially the consummation of the document most responsible for securing a final homeland for the Jew, the Balfour Declaration.

By the time Brandeis was confirmed US Supreme Court Justice spring of 1916, he had been the leader of the American Zionist movement for two years and a longtime intimate adviser to US president Woodrow Wilson. As you would expect Brandeis’ words carried much weight in many circles, Brandeis inside a three circle Venn diagram uniquely positioned to press for a Jewish homeland.

“It is social justice which Zionism represents, and every bit of that is the American ideals of the twentieth century.” Louis Brandeis, (16)

Immediately following Wilson’s declaration of war on April 6, 1917, British Foreign Secretary Arthur Balfour led a diplomatic mission to Washington, landing on April 22, 1917.

Officially the Balfour Mission was to ‘promote wartime cooperation’, but Balfour’s visit was primarily financial. The true intentions of Balfour and the rest of his entourage, including the governor of the Bank of England, Walter Cunliffe, was to bring the Americans up-to-speed on the lucrative past of British imperialism. With the United States now a committed belligerent in the Great War, previous treaties and agreements made by the French and British in Italy, Africa, the Near East, and other areas around the world, had to be laid on the table. And it is in this light we see the depth to Brandeis’ influence.

Brandeis the eminent insider while Chaim Weizmann was very much considered the outsider to Wilson’s circle. Where Weizmann struggled to get access (even by repeated cable), Brandeis arrived as an invited and eminent guest. Where Weizmann, because of his personality hit serious diplomatic roadblocks, “the peoples attorney” smoothed political and personal tensions.

Clearly, it is because of Brandeis’ influence on the American Zionist movement and American Jewry in general, groups whos blessings Weizmann desperately needed, that Brandeis became an integral figure, “the sage adviser to all”, even more so than Weizmann, in the final drafting of the Declaration.

“Brandeis’s personal influence was doubly important, for he combined the roles of a Jewish leader and a close adviser of President Wilson. When Balfour came to the United States to consult his new allies shortly after America entered the war, the new British Foreign Minister made a point of meeting Brandeis. All contemporaries agree in regarding these meetings as being critical in opening up the last phase of the negotiations for a British pro-Zionist policy declaration.” pg. 71, Brandeis and the Origins of the Balfour Declaration, Ben Halpern.

“Weizmann launched a series of urgent pleas to his American contacts, and to Brandeis in particular, for their aid in a situation in which the future prospects of Zionism were critically involved … Weizmann pinned his hopes on Louis Brandeis as the person most capable of influencing President Wilson.” (17)

“Dr. Weizmann gladly assented to the Brandeis project. He expressed his gratitude by impulsively kissing Brandeis’ hand.” Pg. 133, Brandeis: A Biographical Sketch, DeHaas.

“Weizmann launched a series of urgent pleas to his American contacts, and to Brandeis in particular, for their aid in a situation in which the future prospects of Zionism were critically involved … Weizmann pinned his hopes on Louis Brandeis as the person most capable of influencing President Wilson.” (17)

“When Balfour came to the United States to consult his new allies shortly after America entered the war, the new British Foreign Minister made a point of meeting Brandeis. All contemporaries agree in regarding these meetings as being critical in opening up the last phase of the negotiations for a British pro-Zionist policy declaration.” (18) 

Balfour met with Brandeis on at least two occasions during his Washington visit (May 7th and 11th), and a large stack of contemporary scholarship concurs, as substantiated above by Ben Halpern, professor of Near East Studies at Brandeis University, that these meetings between Brandeis and Balfour were critical, and served as a major coming together of Anglo-American relations. 

Brandeis and Balfour were careful not to debate first rights to self-determination between the Jew and Arab, especially on numerical grounds, as the Hebrew then as now grossly outnumbered by his fellow Arab Semite. Brandeis, one of the first to actively promote dual loyalty between the US and a Jewish homeland was very influential on Balfour, wielding all the authority vested within him Brandeis an essential figure in the conception, promotion, and especially the consummation of the document most responsible for securing a final homeland for the Jew:

“Balfour and Louis Brandeis, a Supreme Court justice and the leading American Zionist, came up with an ingenious solution. It was wrong to use mere ‘numerical self-determination’: a great many potential inhabitants of the Jewish home in Palestine still lived outside its borders. ‘And Zionism,’ said Balfour, ‘be it right or wrong, good or bad, is rooted in age-long traditions, in present needs, in future hopes of far profounder import than the desires and prejudices of the 700,000 Arabs who now inhabit that ancient land.’” (19)

The many drafts of the Balfour Declaration were made in London and passed back and forth between the British and American War office channels and Brandeis was central to its final draft.

“The draft cabled from government to government, was handed to the Brandeis regime for its approval. After a most necessary revision, President Wilson, acting through Colonel House who was in full sympathy with the Zionist aims, authorized cabling to the British government the version that was published, and to which all the allied governments in turn gave their approval.” 


1. xi, Brandeis: A Life, Urofsky.

2. In Search of a New Zion: New Light on Brandeis’ Road to Zionism, Allon Gal. Gal Professor Emeritus, Ben-Gurion Institute for the Study of Israel and Zionism, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Sede Boquer Campus.

3. pg. 443, Brandeis: A Free Mans Life.4. New York Public Library Archives and Manuscripts, Palestine Economic Corporation records 1921-1944,,and%20resettlement%20of%20Jewish%20Palestine5. New York Public Library Archives and Manuscripts, Palestine Economic Corporation records 1921-1944,,and%20resettlement%20of%20Jewish%20Palestine6. Two Rothschilds and the Land of Israel.

7. Two Rothschilds and the Land of Israel.

8. pg. 34 American Jewish History Volume 69 No. 1 September 1979, pg. 34-59 Johns Hopkins University Press; Brandeis’ Role in American Zionism, Historically Reconsidered, Evyatar Friesel. Friesel professor Emeritus of Modern Jewish History at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. He’s previously held academic positions at Ben Gurion University Department of Jewish History and Department of History, Friedrich Schiller University Jena Germany.

9. Brandeis personal letter to Felix Warburg Esq., Treasurer, American Jewish Relief Committee, July 21, 1916.

10. pg. 46,47 Brandeis’ Role in Zionism Reconsidered.

11. pg. 23, Louis D Brandeis Zionist Leader, Jonathan D. Sarna.

12. pg. 46, Brandeis’ Role in Zionism Reconsidered.

13. Ibid pg. 46.

14. Ibid pg. 46, 47.

15. pg. 35 The Crisis of Zionism, Peter Beinart.

16. Ibid pg. 34.

17. pg. 471, The Journal of Modern History, Volume 64. No 3, September 1992, pg. 455-499, The Balfour Declaration and Its Maker: A Reassessment, Jehuda Reinharz, Brandeis University.

18. Studies in Zionism, No. 7, 1983, Ben Halpern, Brandeis and the Origins of the Balfour Declaration; Ben Halpern was a professor of Near Eastern studies at Brandeis University, retiring in 1981 and a member of the Jewish Agency Executive from 1968 to 1972. His numerous publications, many of which were published in Jewish Frontier and Midstream magazines, deal chiefly with problems of Zionism, Israeli society, and the role of the Jews in U.S. society. Halpern’s publications include The Idea of the Jewish State(1969) and a Clash of Heroes: Brandeis, Weizmann, and American Zionism (1987).

19. pg. 422, Paris 1919, Six Months That Changed the World, Margaret McMillan.


Brandeis Part 2: Scientific Management

“Wilson found the judicial outlook of Louis D. Brandeis, Harvard Law School professor, highly congenial. Brandeis was the author of the historic ‘Brandeis Brief,’ which ushered in a whole new phase of constitutional law based more on sociological than legal interpretation.” (1)

Florence Kelley, founder National Consumers League.

Josephine Goldmark.

Brandeis home at 6 Otis Place.

Overlooking the Charles River from the Brandeis home, Boston.

Brandeis and the National Consumer’s League

The Brandeis Brief was submitted to Judge Brewer during the landmark 1908 Supreme Court case, Muller v. Oregon, where the court was considering the constitutionality of limiting women’s working hours. Brandeis hired by the National Consumers League to counsel in behalf of the State of Oregon. Brandeis was hired personally by two of its most influential leaders, the NCL’s chairman of publications committee Josephine Goldmark, and its executive director and co-founder, Florence Kelley. Josephine happens to be the sister of Brandeis’ wife Alice, which under normal circumstances makes her his sister-in-law, except Alice, Josephine and Louis were all second cousins.

Kelley along with Jane Addams and Josephine Lowell created the League to correct through acts of reform legislation the unsatisfactory working conditions inherent to unregulated industry. What they were really doing was establishing the framework to a new international system of manufacturing and trade.  

“The National Consumers League was founded in 1899 by Jane Addams [ and Florence Kelley, and Josephine Lowell ] as a social reform movement concerned with the conditions under which goods were manufactured and distributed … The League promoted the creation of administrative agencies to enforce protective legislation and played a major role in defending reform measures in court.” (emphasis added) National Consumers’ League Records, Library of Congress, Washington D.C.

Brandeis famously introduced to the courtroom an as-of-yet-never-before-seen technique in arguing case law giving birth to a revolutionary new sociological jurisprudence covered in more depth in a later, two-part article we named, Brandeis Part 6: the Science and Philosophy of Law. Simply put, it was the combining of sociology, “the science of social order and progress”, with law, “the most specialized engine of social control.” The insertion of the scientific expert.

The law an underappreciated aspect to the social control of society despite it being the most obvious. Having already spoken of Brandeis’ influence on Wilson and the executive branch of the US government in, Brandeis Part 1: Architect of the New Freedom, we now tell of the events that led to Brandeis’ transformation of the judicial and legislative branches, first as a nationally known radical reform attorney and then as a confirmed member of the highest legal seat in America, the US Supreme Court.

The meeting at Brandeis’ Boston home between he and the founders of the NCL marks the beginning of a legislative altering relationship that would last at least another decade. Once Brandeis was confirmed as a justice of the supreme court, his responsibilities as legal counsel to the NCL were taken over by his young protege Felix Frankfurter.

Josephine Goldmark describes the nascent moments of the Brandeis brief:

“On November 14, 1907, Florence Kelley and I were actors in a little scene which, though of course we did not realize it then, marked a turning point in American social and legal history. We had come to Boston to see my brother-in-law, Louis D. Brandeis, then a practicing attorney in Boston, and we sat in the back library of his home on a little street called Otis Place. We had come to ask Mr. Brandeis to appear in the Supreme Court of the United States to defend the Oregon ten-hour law for women, attacked as unconstitutional under the Fourteenth Amendment.” Brandeis, looked thoughtfully out over the Charles River and accepted, “thus began a collaboration between Mr. Brandeis and the Consumers League which gave a revolutionary new direction to judicial thinking, indeed to the judicial process itself.”(2)

“He [Brandeis] then outlined what he would need for a brief: namely facts, published by anyone with expert knowledge of industry in its relation to women’s hours of labor, such as factory inspectors, physicians, trade unions, economists, social workers. If I could return to Boston within a fortnight with such printed matter, sufficiently authoritative to pass muster, we would then work up the material in the form of a brief.” (3)

 “Josephine Goldmark’s work as a reformer in the Progressive Era did much to redesign the American social contract.” (4)

The Brandeis Brief set the method of argument for other landmark minimum hour cases in 1909, 1912, and 1914, as well as minimum wage cases in 1913 and 1914, Brandeis was assisted greatly in the collection of material by Josephine Goldmark and the NCL, and the entire scheme heavily funded by Dorothy Paine Whitney, the Russell Sage Foundation, and the Fabian Society. The series of groundbreaking cases in which Brandeis was counsel, won by way of scientific expert opinion, set the foundation for a new scientific philosophy of law for the 20th century.

Consisting of over one hundred pages of sociological data, Brandeis’ brief devoted only two pages to legal argument.  Largely due to the efforts of Brandeis, working with Goldmark, Kelley and the National Consumer’s League at the height of the Progressive Era, we see the pioneering moments of arguing US case law using facts and statistics – two things susceptible to a wide array of subjective opinion.

By getting law to change with a progressive society they created a new living law steered by social science research data, turning the feedback loop into a social reform perpetual motion machine. This shaping of society using critical observation and applied scientific experimentation  the primary method and meaning of social sciences from its inception.

The opinion of soft social science experts now presided over the court room just as in the oval office, traditional legal precedent and the US Constitution were deemed out-of-date and promptly tossed out of court. Just as Brandeis used Harvard social scientists to infiltrate the executive branch of the US government, he did the same to the judicial and legislative branches. 

“Miss [Josephine] Goldmark states: “The Brandeis Brief in the Muller case, reprinted together with Judge Brewer’s opinion, was in great demand from law schools and universities as well as from labor unions and libraries .. Gone was the deadening weight of legal precedent.” (5)

Judge Brewer stating in his final assessment, “before examining the Constitutional question, to notice the course of legislation as well as expressions of opinions from other than judicial sources … the brief filed by Mr. Louis D. Brandeis … is a very copious collection of these matters”, but in regards to the facts found within the brief, Brewer admitted, “may not be, technically speaking, authorities, and in them there is little or no discussion of the constitutional question.” (6)

Brewer admitting rightfully that facts aren’t the truth, and quantitative evidence is not necessarily qualitative.

In the “new precedent”, the judge himself becomes witness to the settling of law through “copious” collections of facts and statistics, Brewer noting they were not “technically speaking, authorities” in themselves, adding for the record that there was “little or no discussion” to the negative effect the attorney’s radical method might have on the US constitution.

According to David Bernstein, law professor at George Mason University School of Law, much of the information found in the brief was of a dubious nature, calling the collection of facts “nonsensical” and “miscellany” and “hardly definitive”.

Owen Fiss, Sterling Professor Emeritus of Law, Yale University and author of The Troubled Beginnings of the Modern State in 1993 concluded Goldmark’s collection of evidence as a “hodgepodge” pg. 175.

In 1914 Goldmark was sponsored by the Russell Sage Foundation to write, Fatigue and Efficiency, once again demonstrating the direct involvement of Skull and Bones. Both The New Republic and the Russell Sage Foundation donated both manpower and money to many NCL causes during this time. Dorothy Paine Whitney, the wife of JP Morgan financier Willard Straight, “paid in full all the cost of printing all the briefs” dating back to the very first, the Brandeis Brief in 1908.

Massive amounts of private money poured into the progressive legislative reform effort, thousands of copies of a thousand reports were published and circulated through the necessary intellectual channels while editor friends of Brandeis sympathetic to the progressive cause, like Norman Hapgood, editor of Harper’s Weekly, wrote a thousand stories in a thousands newspapers, magazines, and journals advocating both Brandeis and his progressive ideals.  

Remembering here that Whitney and Straight funded the founding of The New Republic in 1914 with Brandeis, Walter Lippmann, Herbert Croly, and Felix Frankfurter. Other progressive magazines were: American Magazine, Collier’s, Cosmopolitan, McClure’s, Munsey’s, and the Independent. “These magazines sold for ten or fifteen cents a copy, instead of the twenty-five and thirty-five cents charged by the older magazines.” pg. 32, The AFL in the Progressive Era, 1910-1915, Philip S. Foner.

Once they could get constitutional law to change with the times it no longer possessed its timeless, inherent value. The foundational nature of the US Constitution being its most enduring and important quality, was the largest deterrent for the authors of all forms of social control and here we see the onset of a deliberate undermining of the foundation of America. Judge Brewer felt it necessary to state officially for the record in his court’s opinion, that it is the “value of a written constitution that it places in unchanging form limitations upon legislative action, and thus gives a permanence and stability to popular government” yet Brewer still ruled in Brandeis’ favour, and the sociological school of thought first put into practice by Brandeis, spread across the country eventually evolving into the dominant philosophy of law in America for the remainder of the 20th century.

Goldmark would continue her legislative activism mostly with Frankfurter following Brandeis’ election to the Supreme Court in 1916 but by then Brandeis had established much of the foundational framework, much of our modern day social contract, from the hours we work, to how we work, to where we work, all formed, not surprisingly, during these critical peak Progressive Era years.

Frederick Winslow Taylor

1911 edition, only distributed to engineers and shop managers. Note the fasces on the front cover.

The Taylor Society

“Scientific Management demands preparedness. The results attained through scientific management depend on universal preparedness. The same preparedness is invoked for industry which is secured to Prussia in her victory over France.” Louis Brandeis, Scientific Management and the Railroads.

This idea of a scientifically governed society not original to our modern times but Brandeis an undeniable central figure in its modern incarnation. Brandeis most responsible with coining the term ‘scientific management’  and popularizing “what many argue today is the most important ‘ism’ of the twentieth century”, Frederick Winslow Taylor’s, The Principles of Scientific Management. (7)

“The whole country at once recognized the importance of conserving our material resources and a large movement has been started which will be effective in accomplishing this object. As yet, however, we have but vaguely appreciated the importance of “the larger question of increasing our national efficiency.” Introduction, The Principles of Scientific Management.

Taylor’s major contribution towards our present day industrial democracy largely goes unnoticed by a disinterested public until now.

Taylorism, as it is known today, was a revolutionary new approach to workshop efficiency. Taylorism driving the Efficiency movement that introduced to the world entirely new concepts like: organized labor, industrial management, industrial relations, and scientific management.  

“By the election of 1912, Brandeis counted some of the nation’s leading engineers (such as Frederick Taylor, Henry Gantt, Harrington Emerson, and F. Lincoln Hutchins) among his most trusted advisers.” Pg. 47, Louis Brandeis: The Making of Regulated Competition, Berk

Brandeis took a very hands on approach, “marshalling publicity” by exploiting his many very influential contacts within the political circles and press clubs of New York, Boston, and Washington, Brandeis organizing the meetings with the leaders of the newly formed Taylor Society, writing out the method of argument for everyone to follow, coordinating, collecting and coaching witnesses.  Here again we see Brandeis gaining influence over a group of important people possessing important technology.

“In October, Brandeis met at Gantt’s apartment in New York with Frank Gilbreth, Jim Dodge, and others.” (8)

Other management pioneers such as Henry Gantt, known for his Gantt Chart, and Frank Gilbreth, known for his motion studies, Morris Llewellyn Cooke for rural electrification, Carl George Barth for his speed-and-feed compound slide rule, all collaborated with Brandeis in bringing scientific management to life. Brandeis even writing the foreword to Gilbreths, Primer of Scientific Management in 1914. They would famously combine Gilbreth’s motion studies with Taylor’s time studies forming an entirely new discipline, time-motion study. This collection of men early pioneers of the cybernetic, eugenic and later technocracy movements.

Brandeis described scientific management as “a revolution in industry comparable only to that effected in the transition from hand labor to machinery.” (9)

Henry Gantt
Frank Gilbreth

Taylor to Brandeis “Please let me congratulate you most warmly upon the masterly way in which you marshalled your forces and presented your testimony, and also upon the publicity which your testimony has received and the interest by the papers all over the country.” (10)

The large stumbling block was presenting to the labor unions an agreement the workers would accept. Nearly to a man, labor revolted at the thought of being scientifically micro-managed.

“Labor was readily able to understand and agree with Brandeis that employers would, without involving large capital expenditure, gain greater productivity from labor, reduced labor costs, more efficient use of plant and equipment, lower interest and  taxes, lesser depreciation charges, reduced stock of raw and process materials, and lessened strain on credit. However, they could not understand or agree with Brandeis as to what employees would gain from scientific management.” (11)

“In studying the resistance of organized labor to scientific management, Valentine came to see that the objection lay not so much in the thing itself as in the fact that it was introduced by the employer and for his own advantage.” (11) 

“The substitute of machinery for unaided human labor was the great industrial achievement of the nineteenth century. The new achievement to which Dr. Taylor points the way consists in elevating human labor itself to a higher plane of efficiency and of earning power.” Henry R. Towne, president American Society of Mechanical Engineers, foreword to Taylor’s, Shop Management (1910). 

The Protocol of Peace

“he [Brandeis] described the protocol system as “a large step toward industrial democracy.” (12)

Eventually came the Protocol of Peace, a revolutionary new industry-wide labor standard, bringing together Valentine’s industrial relations with Taylor’s principles of scientific management, forming Sidney Webb’s industrial democracy. It was the long anticipated partnership between capital and labour, a sort of syndicalism of shared responsibility and shared compensation. The labor unions and their leaders were the scientific entering wedge between man and his own labor. New York City, the center of American industry, was the proving ground, and the Lower East Side became their laboratory. It was in many ways the domestication of the human being. And once standards and protocols were established in NYC, they quickly spread across the entire country and adopted industry wide.

“INDUSTRIAL DEMOCRACY was a term that before 1909 had significant relevance only for reformers and intellectuals. Events in Progressive Era New York grounded this abstract theory into the streets of the Lower East Side. The conflicts of the ladies’ garment industry provided a ready-made laboratory. The Protocol of Peace, a radical trade agreement in New York City’s ladies’ garment industry, ushered in a new experiment with industrial democracy.” (13)

When the Protocol of Peace was signed on September 2, 1910 it “ushered in a new era of industrial labor relations.” American Jewish archives, Protocol of Peace.

“The strikes …. set the stage and organized both workers and owners into powerful groups necessary for an industry-wide agreement. Industrial democrats used this canvas as provided by workers to paint a new picture. Men ….such as Louis Brandeis … and others marshaled the power of social science and used their influence to broker deals to gain a seat at the industrial relations table.” (14)

“Industrial Democracy provides an important lens through which to view IR during the Progressive Era. Industrial democracy was one of the handful of ideas that defined Progressive Era reformers. It signaled a new scientific approach to labor in America as well as a fundamental recommitment to democratic principles.” (15)

“The Protocol of Peace fashioned by Brandeis to settle the second strike, was a unique and revolutionary institution. It gave workers collective bargaining and brought about improved conditions, better wages and hours, safer and cleaner work places, and a host of other important reforms.” (16)

“The Cloakmakers’ Strike of 1910, to use Samuel Gompers’s apt phrase, was ‘more than a strike, [it was] … an industrial revolution’ because it created a new system of IR, finishing what started in 1909. ‘The signing of the Protocol,’ as the contract that ended the strike was called, as historian Louis Levine has noted, ‘ushered in a new period of constructive experimentation in collective bargaining.’ Benjamin Stolberg, another earlier historian of the union, believed that ‘the Protocol of Peace marked a decisive turning point [in part because] … its basic idea was later copied by the other needle trades …. And in time its influence spread throughout American industry.” (17)

The Haymarket Affair of 1886, the Homestead Strike of 1892, the Uprising of Twenty Thousand of 1909, the Triangle Shirtwaist Fire of 1911, the Cloakmakers’ Strike of 1910, the 1913 Phelps Dodge Mining Explosion, the 1914 Ludlow Massacre, were just some among many high profile labor wars that erupted out of the industrial revolution, all served as a catalyst for a radical reform of industry relations that led to a complete overhaul of American life. A separation of history into a before and after. These labour wars part of the Great Revolt in the US that coincided with the Great Unrest in Britain and the Great Labour Revolt in Canada.

As you could imagine, labour revolted at the idea of such control measures we find normal today, the workers saw no advantage for them in their being managed scientifically, they saw only in the scheme what we witness as undeniably true today, that the worker was never meant to share in neither profit nor leisure. The manufactory exploited the human being to its own advantage and today we bare witness to a system ridding itself of labour entirely, as was the plan from the beginning. Brandeis helped force into reality an entirely new promise of American life. The Progressive plan pushed through sparing no expense, we see the breaking of the old American spirit, the first staggered steps of the rugged individual. And just as today (perhaps the most reformatory period since the Progressive Era), change, and moving forward are all done in the name of efficiency and preparedness.


  1. pg. 150, The Fabian Freeway.
  2. pg. 143, The Impatient Crusader, Josephine Goldmark.
  3. pg. 155, Josephine Goldmark, Impatient Crusader: Florence Kelley’s Life Story.
  4. Jewish Women’s Archive, Josephine Goldmark,
  5. pg. 150, The Fabian Freeway
  6. pg. 218, Brandeis: A Life, Urofsky.
  7. Peter Jennings, ABC Nightly News, The Century, Taylorism.
  8. pg. 431, One Best Way, Robert Kanigel 
  9. pg. 43, Brandeis Beyond Progressivism
  10. pg. 434, One Best Way, Robert Kanigel.
  11. pg. 57, Publications of the American Jewish Historical Society, Volume 41, No. 1, September, 1951, pg. 41-60, Brandeis and Scientific Management, Oscar Kraines. Johns Hopkins University Press.
  12. Citation needed.
  13. pg. 40, Brandeis, Beyond Progressivism
  14. pg. 23, Triangle Shirtwaist, the Protocols of Peace, and Industrial Democracy in Progressive Era New York, Richard A. Greenwald. Greenwald professor of history and Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences at Fairfield University, Connecticut, on the board of the Journal of Planning History.
  15. pg. 23, 24, Triangle Shirtwaist.
  16. pg. 10, The Triangle Shirtwaist.
  17. Citation needed.
  18. Citation needed.

Brandeis Part 1: The Architect of the New Freedom


Louis Dembitz Brandeis was born on November 13, 1856, in Louisville Kentucky to Adolph Brandeis and Frederika Dembitz. The Brandeis family originating from a small city on the river near Prague, Czech Republic called Brandeis on the Elbe. Louis grew up one of four children in a family of followers of the radical Yaakov Franck (Jacob Frank). Frankism a sort of degenerate antinomianism, or a rejection of all moral and social norms. (1)

The Brandeis family part of a long Rabbinical line of social reformers, Adolph himself a liberal revolutionary who moved his young family to the States, narrowly escaping the fallout of the 1848 Austrian Revolutions.

It was in 1848 that Adolph was chosen as a representative by the oldest members of the Brandeis, Dembitz, and Wehle families, to travel to North America as an envoy or scout to “study American conditions and select a location”. pg. 15, Brandeis: A Free Man’s Life, Alpheus Thomas Mason, McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence Emeritus at Princeton University.

“Adolph arrived in New York, traveled for a while in the East, and then went on to the agricultural Middle West, visiting farms and villages along the way. Young Brandeis’s pleasure and facility in travel were greatly enhanced by the companionship of a young friend of the Wehles then on a business trip to the Unites States to secure information about American investments for the House of Rothschild.” pg. 15 Brandeis: A Free Mans Life.

This all amounting to a strange chapter in the biography of an eventual member of the US Supreme Court and advisor to the US president, and despite many efforts to suppress his upbringing, it remains after all these years still true, and the present-day narrative surrounding Brandeis remains largely apologetic, if not completely dismissive of his many obvious and concerning conflicts of both interest and character. 

“Brandeis’ grandfather and great-grandfather in Prague had been leaders in the Frankist cult that swept Central Europe in the late eighteenth century.” (2)

“He [Jacob Frank] slept with his followers, and maybe even his daughter. He preached a nihilistic doctrine that saw this world as intrinsically corrupt, and believed that the best way to imitate God was to cross every boundary, transgress every taboo, and mix the sacred with the profane.” Rabbi Jay Michaelson, PhD in Jewish Thought Hebrew University; JD Yale Law School; assistance professor at Chicago Theological Seminary; visiting scholar at the Center for LGBTQ and Gender Studies in Religion; and contributor to CNN, MSNBC, and Meet the Press.

“Louis Brandeis had a portrait of Frank’s daughter Eva on his desk at the Supreme Court, an heirloom he received from his Dembitz relatives, whose ancestors were followers of Frank.” Brandeis, eventually marrying, Alice Goldmark, his second cousin and daughter of prominent Austrian chemist the discoverer of red phosphorous, Joseph Goldmark. (3)(4) 

Despite his family not being able to afford it, young Louis somehow entered Harvard Law School in the fall of 1875, Brandeis walking the hallowed halls of the Ivy League just shy of his nineteenth birthday, graduating in 1877 class valedictorian, cum laude, Phi Beta Kappa Society – at the age of twenty. Brandeis recorded the highest-grade scores in the history of Harvard Law School, setting an academic standard that stood for eighty years.

Brandeis recognized even by academic historians as a radical social reformer and a highly contentious nomination to the Supreme Court. The fight for confirmation lasted nearly a half year, from late January to early June of 1916. A nomination rightly contested more heavily than any other in American history. By 1916, Brandeis’ many conflicting political interests were seen by many as problematic for a Supreme Court Justice. Brandeis largely deemed by public opinion unfit for public office yet once confirmed, he sat on the Supreme Court for nearly twenty-five years.

As we at and The History of Propaganda began our investigation into the life of Louis Dembitz Brandeis, we quickly realized we were witnessing emerging from the pages a figure of monumental historical importance, an importance certainly undeserving of his present-day place in near complete obscurity.  Herein we submit our report on ‘the peoples attorney’, and ask first of all, how a man on such a radical social reforming bender could have been even considered for associate justice of the Supreme Court of the United States.  

Louis D. Brandeis

Yaakov Franck

Eva Franck

Harvard Law School, Class of 1877. Brandeis circled.

 “He [Brandeis] was the forerunner of other social activist lawyers who were later appointed to the Court, such as Thurgood Marshall and Ruth Bader Ginsburg.” (5)

Today in American academia, it seems strange that Brandeis’ reputation still stands strong some 80+ years after his passing in 1941.  It’s almost as if people have been deliberately kept from looking deeper into the man. Brandeis remains a respected and revered beacon of modern social justice movements and Brandeis University stands today as an institution  to Brandeis’ radical, Progressive ideals. When a critical analysis of Brandeis is honestly undertaken, this humanitarian, man-of-the-people persona quickly becomes a contrived and disingenuous cover story for a man with many faces who is only now being burdened with the appropriate historical weight earned from such a prolonged and prolific career of anti-Constitutional, anti-American radical social reform. 

In respect to both the Brandeis family and you the reader, we at recognize the large responsibility that comes with exposing past lies agreed upon and have painstakingly searched out and procured a collection of the most legitimate and trusted source material, extracting primary and secondary artifacts from the personal writings of Brandeis, his family, his close friends and his many, many business associates. We’ve borrowed vigorously from the archives of several prestigious universities including Brandeis’ very own, compiling dozens of doctoral dissertations from recognized and award-winning authors who were given unfettered access to the Brandeis personal papers, and as a result, we have compiled and catalogued a near library of related material in an effort to gain greater context of the both the man and the times in which he lived. Without any further delay, the story of Louis D. Brandeis begins with his friendship with Woodrow Wilson.

Brandeis: Architect of the New Freedom

“At the end of August, Wilson sought one contributor in particular, but not for his money … Wilson needed somebody to sharpen his message … he wanted to discuss the issue with the most incisive mind on the subject. Fortunately, that man had already expressed an interest in his campaign, though when he shuttled from Boston to New York by night boat August 27, Louis D. Brandeis could not have known that he, as much as anybody, would shape the future of Woodrow Wilsons campaign and career.” (6)

Brandeis was thought of by Wilson as his obvious pick for Attorney General or Secretary of Commerce. Wilson telling Rabbi Stephen Wise he “needed Brandeis everywhere.”  Brandeis is today touted as the very “architect of the New Freedom”, Wilson’s 1912 Progressive platform. We argue when Brandeis travelled to meet the president he had already formulated his progressive plan and knew exactly what he was doing. From that initial, introductory meeting at Sea Girt, Wilson leaned heavily on the expertise of Brandeis – “who’s opinions on economic questions he respected above all others”. (7)

“Because Brandeis understood the problem thoroughly, because he was ready with a definite plan for the bridling of monopoly, he became the chief architect of the New Freedom.” Pg. 110, Prophets of Regulation, Thomas K. McCraw.

ON AUGUST 28, 1912, Louis D. Brandeis, the nationally known Boston attorney, and Woodrow Wilson, the Democratic presidential nominee then serving as New Jersey governor, met secretly over lunch in Sea Girt, New Jersey, the coastal town where the governor summered.” (8)

“Louis D. Brandeis, the chief architect of the New Freedom” (9)

The centerpieces of this New Freedom were the creation of the Federal Trade Commission and the Federal Reserve Board. The Fed a centralized banking scheme independent of the government based on lending money at interest that has led to a collective debt so large and crippling as to render an entire nation paralyzed by a forever growing debt clock. The Federal Trade Commission, a regulatory institution that has since its benevolent inception expanded into a vast network of surveillance and monitoring well beyond its original publicly stated intentions. 

The many committees, commissions, and councils created by Brandeis during the Wilson administration’s first term representing the actual manifestation of Lippmann’s proposed “intelligence bureaus”, an essential part of Graham Wallas’ futuristic utopian Great Society or Sidney Webb’s scientifically governed, Industrial Democracy.  Through the founding first of these regulatory agencies led by Brandeis we see the very first glimpses into the administrative state. Lester Frank Ward’s, Welfare State.

“For Attorney General, Wilson first thought of Louis D. Brandeis, the chief architect of the New Freedom.” (10)

“Wilson had intended his Secretary of Commerce to be one of America’s staunchest Progressives, his advisor Louis D. Brandeis. Earliest mention of his name, however, incited considerable protest. Politicians, businessmen, and attorney’s denounced him as a radical – a reckless meddler.” (11)

 “The New Freedom called for a ‘new declaration of independence’.” (12)

“We all know Louis Brandeis is one of the most influential Justices on the Supreme Court. But fewer of you may know that he was also the person who conceived the Federal Trade Commission.” Julie Brill, Commissioner, United States Federal Trade Commission, Privacy: From the Woods to the Weeds, September 15, 2011, An Address before the International Association of Privacy Professionals. Brill served as Commissioner of the FTC from 2010 to 2016 and is now Chief Privacy Officer and Corporate Vice President for Global Privacy, Safety and Regulatory Affairs at Microsoft.

Brill fits the pattern of everyone else in this story, after graduating magna cum laude with a BA in economics from Ivy League (Princeton), she then goes back and forth between public duty as Commissioner of the FTC and Chief Privacy Officer at Microsoft. Here Brill exhibiting a conflict of interest through public-private partnerships made commonplace during Brandeis’ time.

“After Woodrow Wilson won the 1912 election, he asked Brandeis to recommend specifically how to solve the problem of the trusts. Brandeis conceived the Federal Trade Commission, which, at Brandeis’s urging, Congress empowered to investigate and prohibit
unfair methods of competition with a “broad and flexible mandate, wide-ranging powers, and the ability, at its best, to respond to the needs of changing times”. (13) 

“[T]he proper role of the government is to encourage not combination, but co-operation.”
— Louis D. Brandeis to Richard Crane, November 11, 1911; in 2 Letters of Louis Brandeis pg. 511,512.

“A SOLICITOR GENERAL once told the lawyer George Farnum that ‘when Mr. Brandeis writes an opinion dealing with a question of federal practice, the law is settled for fifty years to come’. While this may be somewhat exaggerated, Brandeis did have a great impact not only on jurisdictional matters but on commercial law, antitrust, administrative law, utility regulation, federalism, and individual liberties”. (14)

“the Federal Trade Commission is the brainchild of Louis D. Brandeis” pg. 1, Privacy: From the Woods to the Weeds, FTC Commissioner, Julie Brill

“When the FTC opened its doors in March 1915, it had become the surprising centerpiece of Wilson’s antitrust program. During the 1912 campaign, Theodore Roosevelt had been the advocate for a strong commission; Roosevelt, who launched a short-lived Progressive Party, would even have allowed an agency to set prices. Wilson was skeptical of a Commission in 1912, and remained skeptical when he launched his antitrust initiative in January 1914; he proposed a purely investigatory body. But when the initiative bogged down, he was persuaded by Louis Brandeis and George Rublee, a friend to Brandeis and a former Roosevelt adviser, to embrace part of the Progressive program: Section 5’s administratively enforced prohibition of ‘unfair methods of competition.’” (15)

As a presidential advisor, Brandeis convinced the president, Congress, the Supreme Court, and the American people to accept radical new approaches to everything from labor legislation and trade unionism to life insurance and public utility, from trust-busting and women’s suffrage to conservation. Brandeis introducing to America new terms like scientific management, regulated competition, industrial relations, standard cost accounting, trade agreement monitoring, resale price maintenance, interlocking directorates, and so on. Brandeis more than anyone else is responsible for placing the first, foundational building blocks of our modern surveillance state through his introduction of a vast network of regulatory agencies.

As an attorney, Brandeis established a radical new method of arguing law and once confirmed Justice, transferred this method to the Supreme Court – making even our Supreme Court Justices social activists. He opened the door to an entirely new interpretation of US law through sociological jurisprudence and, as a concerned Jewish-American, Brandeis almost unfathomably, rises through the rank and file to lead American Zionism to their ultimate goal of gaining a homeland in Palestine. Brandeis crucial in persuading the Christian Evangelical movement, now numbering over one hundred million, to offer its support for a new Zion by befriending key founders of Dispensationalism and the Christian fundamental movement.

Brandeis and the famous ‘trust busting’ investigations initiated on August 27, 1912 helped further establish Brandeis’ reputation as the peoples attorney and allowed him to expand on his idea of regulatory competition, something most assuredly discussed at Sea Girt that same day. In fact the date significant here in that Brandeis meets Wilson for the first time on the very same day the Commission on Industrial Relations (Walsh Commission) began its investigation into industrial working conditions. This really the opportunity to initiate federally a method bringing together the employer and the employee through the creation of industrial relations and scientific management, a perfecting of the manufacturing processes that organized labor stood for obvious reasons solidly in opposition of.  In the end the investigation did little to curb monopolization yet set in place a framework for labor still dominant in our world today.

As a mediator in the creation of labor law Brandeis combined scientific management with industrial relations in bringing together employee and employer, Brandeis surrounding himself with key members of the Taylor Society in directing the nascent moments of our modern day Industrial Democracy. Brandeis here displaying a pattern we see repeated in each of the stories to follow, by gaining influence over and then becoming the guiding hand to a newly discovered technology and the small but very influential group of men that created it, Brandeis radically altered the old traditional definitions of American life in ways we are only now coming to terms with. 

“Louis Brandeis conceptualized regulated competition and introduced it into public debate. Political entrepreneurs in Congress enacted many of Brandeis’s proposals into law.” (16)

“Brandeis formulated a blueprint for a federal trade commission from his experience with railroad regulation.” (17)

“When Woodrow Wilson (as Theodore Roosevelt had done) was looking to promote his agenda, on the counsel of Brandeis he opted for commissions. Commissions had the power and the merit of regulating industry and avoiding the need for direct legislative intervention.” (18)

“Brandeis decomposed scientific management and nineteenth-century common law, and recombined their parts in a syncretic blueprint for a federal trade commission.” Pg. 20, Brandeis and the Making of Regulated Competition

“Insofar as the career of a single person illustrates both the problems that led to the FTC’s creation and the reasons for its subsequent failure, that person is Louis D. Brandeis. The most influential critic of trusts during his generation, Brandeis served from 1912 until 1916 as Woodrow Wilson’s chief economic adviser and was regarded as one of the architects of the FTC.” Pg. 81, 82, Prophets of Regulation.


1. Brandeis on the Elbe. The surname Brandeis most likely is derived from this area of Europe.\
2. pg. 28, Arthur S Link, Woodrow Wilson and the Progressive Era.

3. His uncle Lewis Naphtali Dembitz was an early Zionist and involved in the 1960 Republican National Convention that elected Abraham Lincoln; see also,

4. Jay Michaelson Heretic of the Month; Sarna the Director, Schusterman Center for Israel Studies. He is also University Professor, Joseph H. and Belle R. Braun Professor of American Jewish History, and has many impressive degrees: PhD Yale, MPhil Yale, MA Yale, MA Brandeis, BA Brandeis BHL Hebrew College; see also

5. The Brandeis Confirmation a Century Later, Oxford University Press. Paul Finkelman and Lance J. Sussman.

6. pg. 239 Wilson, A. Scott Berg. Andrew Scott Berg an internationally known, New York Times bestselling author whos other works include Lindbergh (1998), a biography of Charles Lindbergh and Making Love. Steven Spielberg purchased the movie rights before the book was published. A Scott Berg a Princeton graduate. Guggenheim Fellowship 1982. Member of the Triangle Club.

7. pg. 48, Arthur S. Link, Woodrow Wilson and the Progressive Era.

8. pg. 22-44, Jewish Justices of the Supreme Court: From Brandeis to Kagan, Brandeis University Press; see also, LOUIS D. BRANDEIS “People’s Attorney,” Presidential Adviser, and Zionist.

9. pg. 28, Arthur S. Link, Woodrow Wilson and the Progressive Era.

10. pg. 28, Arthur S. Link, Woodrow Wilson and the Progressive Era.

11. Pg. 264, Wilson, A. Scott Berg.  

12. pg. 150 The Fabian Freeway, Rose L. Martin.

13. Brandeis to Charles Richard Crane, Nov. 11, 1911, in 2 Letters of Louis Brandeis, 511, 512 (Melvin I. Urofsky & David W. Levy eds.) [hereinafter LBL]; see also, pg. 4, The Origins of the FTC: Concentration, Cooperation, Control, and Competition, Marc Winerman. Winerman a former attorney, Office of the General Counsel, Federal Trade Commission. The views expressed herein are the author’s and do not necessarily represent the views of the Commission or any Commissioner.

14. pg. 610, Alpheus Thomas Mason, Louis D Brandeis: A Life.

15. pg. 873, 874, Antitrust Law Journal, Volume 71, No. 1 (2003), pp. 1-97, The FTC at Ninety: History Through Headlines, Marc Winerman.

16. Introduction, Louis Brandeis and the Making of Regulated Competition, 1900-1932, Gerald Berk, professor of political science University of Oregon.

17. pg. 68, Louis Brandeis and the Making of Regulated Competition.

18. The Origin and Development of the Interstate Commerce Commission, David Zucker Master of Liberal Arts thesis, Harvard University.


1913 Dawn of The New Age

“‘progressive’ is what we like, and the word ‘new,’ be it the New Nationalism of Roosevelt, the New Freedom of Wilson, or the New Socialism of the syndicalists.”

Drift and Mastery, Walter Lippmann

Introduction xix

During our forensic investigation into the Progressive Era (1910-1920), we came upon one particular year more interesting than any other. The year, 1913. A year so profound in its influence that we contend there were no other in the twentieth century more responsible for our modern-day condition. It was while researching the Wilson administration that we noticed first the many accomplishments during Wilson’s extraordinary first full year in office. Even more intriguing was how each of the most relevant founding fathers of Progressivism, Wilson included, all published books, not only during the president’s first term but during Wilson’s first year in office. All within months of each other, and it appears they were all intent on applying the word ‘new’ to the titles. Even the subject matter of each book echoed the other, all of them carrying the same moral message, each promoting Theodore Roosevelt as the movements leader. Each containing parallels in their scheme, calling for a more centralized, scientifically technical government built upon the two main pillars of Progressivism: Efficiency and Preparedness. 

Herein we describe the extraordinary events of the year 1913 and declare that these are the men who put ‘new’ in ‘new world order’. These were the men who established the forward motion necessary to move society at large through an age of radical social reform. Herein we detail the philosophies, ideologies and concepts that inspire the institutions, foundations, and organizations, that spark the most influential political movement in American history and the most radical reforms of the human being ever recorded in the Western world.   

The Federal Reserve

The Twelve Federal Reserve Banks, all of a restrained, stripped, starved, or even brutal neo-classical architectural styling.

Rome University, 1938

Zeppelinfield, Germany, 1938

Woodrow Wilson inaugurated as President of the United States

Wilsonianism opened the flood gates to all kinds of domestic and foreign policy that today still stand as representatives of those very institutions most destructive to our Western world. His first term focused primarily on domestic issues through his New Freedom initiatives, while his second term established now longheld American foreign attitudes, and a new order of things through internationalism. Listed below is an incomplete list of radical social reforms made during Wilson’s first twelve months in office.

The Federal Reserve founded. This private organization, based on usury and speculation, lending money to the Unites States at interest, may be the most profoundly responsible for our modern day enslavement. Created two days before Christmas in 1913 as an answer to financial panics, the Federal Reserve has done little in the over one hundred years since its creation to ameliorate financial crashes from occurring on the regular. The Great Depression itself occurring only a decade and a half after the Fed’s founding.

Every generation since has suffered, and the abhorrently high national debts of all Western countries can look to the centralization of the banking industry as the main culprit. The Fed, created under deep secrecy, involving all of the usual suspects including the man who some even call its architect, Louis Dembitz Brandeis.

The Federal Trade Commission Act, Savings Bank Life-Insurance, a Federal Income Tax, the Clayton Anti-Trust Act, all monumental in themselves, also appear for the first time during Wilsons first year. This we see when looking through the lens of an investigative forensic historian, as the creation of the Administrative State. The Progressive mantra is ‘a centralized government led by the technical expert’, and each institution within the State fulfilling the role of the expert, each advising the government through what Lippmann called “intelligence bureaus”.

Which reminds us to mention how the new world order can be seen in the very architecture of the Federal Reserve building itself.  The Eccles Building was constructed, as were many government buildings in the 1930s under Franklin Delano Roosevelt, in the Restrained, or Starved, or Strained Neoclassical style preferred by all totalitarian leaders of the twentieth century including: Stalin, Lenin, Mussolini, Hitler, FDR and Woodrow Wilson. A style in which all ornamentation, imagination, and beauty was removed, the sheer stone resembling the coldness of later brutalism, dominant and intimidating, the gargantuanism of government.

Harry S. Truman, U.S. State Department

Robert  F. Kennedy, U.S. Justice Department

The Principles of Scientific Management, written by Frederick Winslow Taylor, was first distributed  only to engineers and factory owners in 1911, but officially republished to the public in 1913.  Both editions with a fasces dead center, pressed right into the very fabric. The management of society through science now known simply as Taylorism, and the concept is largely considered today as, “the most influential ‘ism’ of the twentieth century”. Taylor’s Principles the most influential book of the movement and a pillar at the very center of the Progressive movement (1900-1914).

The venerable Louis Brandeis wasn’t just involved in the creation of the Fed, he is the one coining the term ‘scientific management’ and popularizing the book through his famous Muller v. Oregon case. The case garnered headlines across the nation, and Brandeis didn’t waste the opportunity. He was the first to argue law almost solely on sociological and scientific data, to the near exclusion of citations, and traditional legal argument. With help from his sister-in-law, Josephine Goldmark, his ‘Brandeis Brief’ altered case law forever and served as a legal landmark that replaced traditional practice of law. Brandeis credited Taylor’s book for the basis of his argument, and elevated the popularity of industrial efficiency across the United States. Brandeis, Frankfurter, and Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. – three Supreme Court Justices – along with the rest of the House of Truth crowd, were very important in changing the attitude of the Supreme Court.

Historical documents showing that a worldwide Taylor Society was born to promote Taylorism, originally funded by the Fabian Society(!)  An early member was Marxist Walter Polakov, who worked with Taylor, Henry Gantt, Frank Gilbreth, and Harrington Emerson in bringing these ideas to Russia and around the world. Polokov working directly with the US Emergency Fleet Corporation as the US entered the Great War.  Lenin, Stalin, and Trotsky all publicly acknowledged the importance of Taylorism.

“Lenin was a political revolutionary untrained in the intracies of factory management. However, he was aware of the writings of the father of scientific management, Frederick W. Taylor, long before the Revolution. Taylor’s work had been translated into Russian and Lenin hoped to find in this model an answer for Russian industry, as the United States had found one at the turn of the twentieth century.” Daniel A. Wren, University of Oklahoma, Scientific Management in the U.S.S.R.

The Principles translated into many languages. Mu Xiangyue, a Shanghai native graduate of scientific agriculture at the University of Illinois and Texas A&M translated it into Chinese and was very popular among a variety of governments for obvious reasons:  “This collective interest in ‘new’ Management extended beyond personnel issues to embrace organizational design, industrial psychology, and the Industrial Rationalization movement around the world.”

“In the past the man has been first; in the future the system must be first.” pg. 7.

Taylor is named only an honourary member at the initial meeting of the Society that would eventually bear his name, showing an already relegated position within the movement. (See bulletin). The main question at the first meeting was of labour unions. Taylor in an address to the Society talked of a meeting he had with Frankfurter and Valentine in which they appear adversarial regarding the role of the union. Taylor speaking from a position sympathetic to the business owners stating the two obstacles forbidding them from joining with the employees was:

“their demand for a restricted output and their demand for collective bargaining. There is not a union in the United States which does not demand these two things. It is an economic fact that increased wages and general greater prosperity can come only with increased output. The unions fight exactly that principle. They must agree upon increased output before we can co-operate with them. Mr. Frankfurter argued that an entirely new set of union men are coming in. They may be coming but we are not willing to acknowledge that they are here. A union of workmen who will not restrict output is what we want.”

Their literature also revealing a future meeting in February of 1915 was to be held in New Haven Connecticut, inside the Mason Laboratory, at Yale University, on “cost accounting”. And a dinner to be held at, of all places, the Taft Hotel. Interesting topic to be discussed at the home of the executive arm of Skull and Bones, The Russell Sage Foundation. And it all took place at a hotel named after son of the founder of Skull and Bones, William Howard Taft. Taylor would be dead by March 1915, and in November of 1916, Valentine would die of a heart attack while having a late dinner at Delmonico’s with Felix Frankfurter, Emory Buckner, Sam Rosensohn, and Harvard psychiatrist and criminologist, Herman Adler. Taylor was only fifty-nine, while Valentine was only forty-four years young.

“Valentine’s business thrived because he had the courage to implement part of the ‘Social Program’ that he and Frankfurter had outlined on the living room floor of the House of Truth when they had ‘discovered the center of the universe.'” Brad Snyder, The House of Truth

Marcel Duchamp’s, Nude Descending A Staircase

Duchamp’s work resembling that of earlier chronophotography by Etienne-Jules Marey, Man Walking, 1890-91

Gutzon Borglum

Nude in a Wood, Henri Matisse

Luxury II, Henri Matisse

The New Spirit. also know as the International Exhibition of Modern Art, begins with the 1913 Armory Show. Promoted as part of a larger movement known, not so coincidentally as, The New Spirit, obscures traditional early American art style by infusing new, experimental styles of European avant-garde, Fauvism, Cubism, Impressionism, and abstract expressionism. We see very clearly the first attempt at altering the image of the human figure. The Changing Images of Man. This the introduction of modern art to America. Guests included on the three-city tour were contemporary legends of the art world: Cezanne, Duchamp, Manet, Matisse, Monet, Renoir, Surat, and Vincent Van Gogh.

The shows were organized by the American Association of Painters and Sculptors and one of the founding members of the AAPS just so happens to be Gutzon Borglum, a frequent guest at the House of Truth, where he designed Mt. Rushmore on the dining room table.

Marcel Duchamp’s, Nude Descending a Staircase, created a stir merely from its title, showing something resembling the shape of a human body, somewhere between cubist and futurist, the figure leaves no indication as to its gender, or whether it is even human.  This painting and several others caused controversy, the imagery of Nude Descending Staircase, when looking closely, show the dynamic fragmentation of the human figure, the knees bent, the body leaning back, the only discernible body parts hidden behind cylinder and abstraction, as the androgynous futuristic figure progressively descends rather than ascends a set of stairs.

“What contributed to the interest provoked by the canvas was its title. One just doesn’t do a nude woman coming down the stairs … it seemed scandalous.” Marcel Duchamp in a late interview seems to point to the figure being female however admits that the name was what may have had everyone interested.

The Armory Shows proved to be scandalous as America was not accustomed to the radical new European modernist art movement. Henri Matisse’s distortion of the human form facing much backlash, and provide yet another example of the soft social science techniques being applied to American society. Their stated mission even was to “lead the public taste in art, rather than follow it.” Sounding much like the agenda of the Metaphysical Club’s infusion of philosophy a decade earlier.

Borglum’s own artistic themes centered of course around heroic images of US nationalism and the aesthetic variation of Bull Moose patriotism. Interesting to note that this infusion of Expressionist art just ahead of its infiltration of Hollywood through the film noir genre – as discussed in our previous article, Hidden in the Shadow of the Sun.  The delay between the two, almost as if they were waiting for the technology of the motion picture to catch up before they could apply it upon society.  The dynamic effect of art in motion far more powerful than the expressionists traditional ability to just paint a still picture.

Borglum was a very active member of the Ancient Free and Accepted Masons, raised in Howard Lodge #35, New York City, on June 10, 1904, and serving as its Worshipful Master 1910–11.

In 1915, he was appointed Grand Representative of the Grand Lodge of Denmark near the Grand Lodge of New York. He received his Scottish Rite Degrees in the New York City Consistory on October 25, 1907. He was close personal friends of Theodore Roosevelt, a fellow well-known Mason, and very active during the 1912 US presidential election campaign as an organizer and member of the Bull Moose Party.

“The scholar and research professor emeritus H. Wayne Morgan considers the ‘conflict between modern and traditional art’ in the early twentieth century to be ‘one of the best known episodes in American cultural history.’ The International Exhibition of Modern Art, the most important art exhibition ever held in the United States, served as the catalyst for this controversy.'”

“The origins of the show lie in the emergence of progressive groups and independent exhibitions in the early twentieth century (with significant French precedents), which challenged the aesthetic ideals, exclusionary policies, and authority of the National Academy of Design, while expanding exhibition and sales opportunities, enhancing public knowledge, and enlarging audiences for contemporary art.” Avis Berman, As National as the National Biscuit Company; The Academy, the Critics, and the Armory Show, Rave Reviews American Art and Its Critics, 1826-1925. New York National Academy of Design, pg. 131

The Blue Nude, Henri Matisse

Imposition of a federal income tax on February 3 by the US government signals the first time a permanent, collective system of taxation is applied in the United States.

Federal Trade Commission founded. While the first speech on the House floor advocating its creation was in February of 1912, and the Act itself was created officially in 1914, the obvious leg work primarily accomplished in the time in between. The FTC an authority on interstate trade set alight by the 1911 decision to break Standard Oil’s monopoly. The conclusions drawn some one hundred years later are clear, these organizations doing very little to curtail wrongdoing while the challenges and issues have only grown more and more profound. The FTC obviously doing very little to prevent monopolization, or Morganization, as we see Standard Oil’s dominance continue unabated, even aided in enlarging their already massive fortune by the ruling, becoming even more absolute only under new titles like: Exxon, Mobil, Esso, and BP. Louis Brandeis also very involved in the creation of the Federal Trade Commission.

Henry Ford installs the moving-chassis assembly line in October of 1913, sparking the era of mass production and the automobile era all at once.  Otherwise known as progressive assembly, the introduction of the assembly line was a revolutionary improvement over the previous semi-automated production line system. Assembly lines for the first time, created an enormous advantage for the employer, the non-stop conveyance system diminished the workforce to a mathematical equation, each detail of the process perfected, allowing the employer to set the pace, minimize labour, and maximize profits. The Highland Park Factory in Michigan shrinking the manufacture time of an automobile from more than 12 hours to less than 2. The first significant joining of man and machine, a connecting of the human hand with the control arm, like two fingers nearly touching, reminiscent of, The Creation of Adam.

This not without significance from another entirely different perspective, in that,  A Brave New World, was set in the year 632 a.f. (after Ford). Ford considered God, and the roll out of the first automobile, marked as the very first day of their utopian calendar. Ford also referring to himself as Freud when speaking of psychological matters.  

The Rockefeller Foundation goes public on March 14, 1913, following the acceptance of its charter. This one 501C, not-for-profit the most responsible Foundation of our enslavement, formed from another private, yet very public sounding, General Education Board. Inspired by an initial $100 million donation from John D. Rockefeller. The Rockefeller Foundation funding the creation of the Council on Foreign Relations, the Inquiry, the Cybernetics Revolution, Alfred Kinsey’s sex research, the Princeton Radio Research Project, and our entire Western education, agricultural, and medical industries. Rockefeller today stands, along side The Federal Reserve, and the “sage advisor to all”, Louis Brandeis, as possible public enemy number one. Rockefeller involvement so omniscient in our lives today, and their many interlocking affiliations so well documented throughout the century by hundreds of researchers, little needs to be said of their involvement in the Dawn of The New Age.

The first Suffrage March on March 3, 1913. One day before Wilson’s inauguration, the Suffragette movement officially gets under way.

A key member of the Woman’s movement was Josephine Goldmark, the aforementioned sister-in-law to Louis Brandeis. Along with other members of the progressive National Consumers League, Goldmark gathered for the Brandeis case, over one hundred pages of statistics to help demonstrate the condition of the female worker. Goldmark also very influential in laying the groundwork for transforming United States labour laws through her progressive activism.  They were instrumental in altering forever the way law was argued for the remainder of the 20th century and beyond through the collection of data, statistics, and the use of social sciences. Goldmark the author of Fatigue and Efficiency officially in 1912, a book published by the Russell Sage Foundation. This putting Louis Brandeis within a whisper of Skull and Bones in yet another way, and with his family having a long rabbinical line back to Bohemia, we look at Brandeis as one of the major architects of the 20th century chaos. His allegiances to Harvard Law, Phi Beta Kappa, and international Zionism, along with his position as “sage advisor to all” including counsel of fellow Phi Beta Kappa’s Woodrow Wilson, Felix Frankfurter, Walter Lippmann et al., place Brandeis in the center of all criminal activity.

The following authors were close friends, confidantes, and even housemates. All are considered ‘fathers of the Progressive movement’. All were accused of being radical reformers of society. All wrote key progressive manifestos while at the House of Truth, and the books were all were published at nearly the exact same time. They all vowed an allegiance to Theodore Roosevelt’s New Nationalism, a strong federal government, centered around preparedness and efficiency, to be run by the scientific expert. Undoubtedly, much of the authoring, organizing and coordination of their books, and the founding of The New Republic, would have happened while all cohabitating at the House of Truth.   

The New Nationalism was a campaign slogan and a collection of Roosevelt speeches published in 1910 inspired from Herbert Croly’s, The Promise of American Life, published in 1909.  These Roosevelt speeches serve as the catalyst for much of what develops in 1913, the House of Truth itself created to support Roosevelt’s Bull Moose campaign, and it is here, in these speeches, we see the first indications that America was preparing for war.

Using the introduction of Taylorism as a catalyst, the American private sector joins forces with the federal government, through their mutual interest in efficiency and preparedness.  Through the soft, facilitating hands of Bernard Baruch, we see the creation of the War Industries Board, the literal manufacture of a new corporatism, the first sightings of the American mass production industry, 20th Century American foreign policy, and the founding of American Fascism.

Roosevelt admitting in his speech, “combinations in industry … cannot be repealed … effort at prohibiting all combination has substantially failed. The way out lies, not in attempting to prevent such combinations, but in completely controlling them in the interest of public welfare.” 

Many then, as do now, point to Croly’s Promises as overtly advocating for Fascism and totalitarian government. Croly while living on Connecticut Avenue, just two minutes from Lippmann & Co., then followed up his tome manifesto by releasing Progressive Democracy in the year 1914.  It seems from this home in the Dupont neighbourhood of Northwest Washington was where the entire idea of Progressivism in America was dreamed up. 


The New History, written by Progressive leader and Harvard BA MA grad, James Harvey Robinson, was more than just a book. It was, just as Roosevelt’s New Nationalism, the beginning of an entire social movement. Only this time, it was a complete rethink of how we look at history. And the social sciences once again take center stage. A selective view of the human past, excluding trivialities, covering more than the “traditional political, diplomatic, and military history”, involving speculative, “interpretation” that utilized “the relevant tools and concepts of the social studies, particularly anthropology, sociology, psychology, economics etc.” All of these more well known today as the social sciences. Just as Brandeis and Frankfurter, Robinson was known as a radical socialist reformer, helping found the New School for Social Research, and called upon historians “to embrace a New History allied to the latest social studies and able to promote a just social order.” 

In its introduction, after first acknowledging Theodore Roosevelt’s The New Nationalism and Woodrow Wilson’s The New Freedom, Harvey Wish identifies three other key figures, as equally important to their progressive cause, The New Jurisprudence of Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., The New Psychology of William James, and The New Education of John Dewey.

Wish revealing a rather interesting nucleus of social reformers all involved in the promotion of progress. Oliver Wendell Holmes often the most honoured of guests at the House of Truth while William James was an important personal influence on Walter Lippmann while at Harvard, and John Dewey helping Robinson, Charles Austin Beard, Alvin Saunders Johnson, and Thorsten Veblen, in founding the New School for Social Research. 

As we’ve explained in our previous article, The House of Truth and the Devil’s Agent, we see Holmes, along with Brandeis and Frankfurter experimenting with US Constitutional Law. These three Harvard PBK Supreme Court Justices saw the Constitution as did James T. Shotwell when authoring the International Labor Organization; or, as did Robinson and Beard when authoring their ‘new’ history; or, as did Sidney Webb and his Fabian cohorts, when forming the League of Nations; as an obstacle to their entire Progressive plan.

James Harvey Robinson

Thorstein Veblen

The Industrialized Man and the US Constitution were repugnant, and they all knew it.

“especially interesting in his [Robinson’s] reliance upon psychology, especially of the Behaviorist variety, and Freudian psychoanalytical thought.” Introduction xx, The New History

Hugo Munsterberg publishes Psychology and Industrial Efficiency, 1913. Munsterberg was an assistant to Wilhelm Wundt, the “father of experimental psychology”, and the first to establish a psychological laboratory at Leipzig University the same year William James did the same at Harvard. Leipzig became a hotbed for the burgeonoing field of what Wundt called physiological psychology. Famous Russian behaviourists, Vladimir Bekhterev and Ivan Pavlov studied under Wundt.

The list of men who studied under, or received their Ph.D from Wundt and then proceeded to establish experimental psychological laboratories of their own at all the major American universities is a long one and include some of the most recognizable names in, not only psychology, but philosophy and common education.

The following list includes all of the Wundtian disciples and the universities where they established psychological laboratories and periodicals, in a coordinated effort to legitimize another soft science. Not insignificantly, these men held the very first doctorates ever given to Americans:

Granville Stanley Hall (the father of developmental psychology, adolescent psychology) at Johns Hopkins and Clark University; James McKeen Cattell at the University of Pennsylvania and Columbia University; Walter Dill Scott at Northwestern University; Charles Hubbard Judd at Yale, New York University, the University of Cincinnati and the University of Chicago; James Earl Russell at the University of Colorado and the Teacher’s College at Columbia University; James Mark Baldwin at the University of Toronto and Princeton Universities; Edward Bratford Titchener (Wundt’s English interpretor), at Cornell; William Lowe at Illinois University; Olin Templin at Kansas University; Harry Kirke Wolfe at the University of Nebraska; Andrew C Armstrong at Wesleyan University; Frank Angell at Cornell and Stanford; Edward Wheeler Scripture at Columbia University; Lightner Witner (the founder of the psychological clinic) at the University of Pennsylvania; George T.W. Patrick at the University of Iowa; Harlow Stearns Gale at the University of Minnesota; George Malcolm Stratton at the University of California Berkeley; and August Kirschmann at University of Toronto.

Munsterberg and his book, like the others before, serve as catalysts for an entire movement. Munsterberg met William James while in Paris, at the First International Conference on Physiological Psychology in 1889. James invited Munsterberg to accept a three year lecture contract at Harvard and would eventually hire the German to lead his new psychology laboratory. Munsterberg would stay much longer than anticipated and was very successful during his Harvard years, becoming the president of the American Psychological Association, president of the American Philosophical Association, a member of the Washington Academy and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences.

Munsterberg would also become influential internationally as the organizer and vice-president of the International Congress of Arts and Sciences at the St. Louis World’s Fair of 1904, vice-president of the International Psychological Congress in Paris in 1900, and vice-president of the International Philosophical Congress at Heidelberg in 1907.  

His book, Psychology and Industrial Efficiency, published in 1913 is considered today as the very beginnings of industrial psychology. Munsterberg wrote to Frederick Winslow Taylor:

“Our aim is to sketch the outlines of a new science, which is to intermediate between the modern laboratory psychology and the problem of economics … the psychological experiment is systematically to be placed at the service of commerce and industry” pg. 3.

Munsterberg bringing together the two disciplines of Wundtian structuralism and James’ functionalism influencing the work of Edward Thorndike, one of the early pioneers of behaviourism who would then in turn inspire the work of a generation including: John B. Watson, and B.F. Skinner. Watson describing psychology as an, “experimental branch of natural science. Its theoretical goal is the prediction and control of behavior.” And Skinner a widely cited social engineer famous for the Skinner Box, his zoological approach to humans and involvement in the Changing Image of Man Study. All of these men today considered the most influential psychologists and thinkers of the 20th Century.

An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States also published in 1913 by James Harvey Robinson’s close confidante and fellow father of the Progressive Movement Charles Beard. Beard wrote the iconoclastic book as a direct critique of the American Founding Fathers and helped to establish a new perspective on American history from its very origins.

Its publication “excited progressives who wished to curb the powers of the Supreme Court”. Interestingly, Beard a student of Robinson’s, arrived at Columbia direct from Oxford, and a Fabian socialist. Both these figures were extremely controversial during their time at Columbia. Both would leave under scandalous conditions to form the New School for Social Research. A Marxist organization as are all social research institutions.

Charles Beard

The New Statesman, a Fabian socialist rag was also created in the year 1913. And as we now know, the Fabians, especially Sidney Webb and George Bernard Shaw ever present at the Inter-Allied Labor Socialist meetings that directly led to the Covenant of the League of Nations. Shaw also present in the Weimar circles. And their work funding the Taylor Society as well as inspiring the entire Progressive movement.

Sidney Webb’s, Industrial Democracy, published in 1902, serving as a catalyst for the Progressive movement in both the UK and the US. Fabian socialism became the British Labor Party and is still very influential in the radical social reformation we see today. A very similar message being evoked today just as then, under similar conditions of war, social justice, and a belief in expertness. For those unfamiliar, the Fabian logo a wolf in sheep’s clothing and their motto, ‘molding the world closer to our hearts desire.’ A strategy they deliver through slow, methodical social change, rather than a more brutal, inhumane, military conquest.

The Great Society, published by another Fabian founding member, Graham Wallas, in 1914. A phrase picked up and used so much in American literary circles by his close personal friend Walter Lippmann that Lippmann himself is often cited as the very coiner of the term. The subtitle of Wallas’ most well known work being ‘a psychological analysis’ and the subject matter a further development of his Harvard speeches entitled Government 31 which Walter Lippmann was present for, in the spring of 1910. Wallas in his preface, addresses Lippmann directly from the London School of Economics , “in the hope that it may be of some help when you write that sequel to your Preface to Politics”, (a book not so coincidentally published also in the year 1913, and the follow up to which Wallas refers is Lippmann’s, Drift and Mastery), published in 1914. Drift and Mastery considering the socio-economic possibilities of a society caught in the “obvious drift of our time” while the government, “gropes for the conditions of mastery”:

Graham Wallas


The New Democracy, published in 1912, was Walter Weyl’s reinterpretation of what democracy means. Weyl very involved in the founding of The New Republic, and according to House of Truth biographer Brad Snyder, was the “third founding editor and principal political writer … a trained economist, freelance journalist.” Snyder calls, The New Democracy, “another important work of progressive political philosophy”.

Weyl’s book advocated for, as did all of their progressive books, a more centralized federal government, less attention on the rights of the individual, experimentation of the Constitution, and more government attention and money be paid towards social equality, social justice, and a reliance on the social science expert. The New Democracy, it should come as no surprise to anyone by now, was written in support of the 1912 presidential campaign of Theodore Roosevelt. The Bull Moose.

The New Republic founded in 1914 by Lippmann, Croly, Frankfurter, Weyl, Alvin Saunders Johnson, along with a four year promise of funding from Dorothy Paine Whitney and her husband, Willard Straight, a JP Morgan representative. Along with guidance from Billings Learned Hand and others connected to Harvard Law School. Their collective dream of scientific liberalism, “a liberalism centered in humanitarian and moral passion and one based in an ethos of scientific analysis”. Frankfurter very involved in the planning stages and:

“was listed as a trustee on the magazines first statement of ownership, attended meetings, and later wrote many signed and unsigned editorials on political and legal issues.” The House of Truth, Brad Snyder, pg. 91.

Croly described the magazine as “radically progressive”.

While officially created in the year 1914, The New Republic’s foundational framework was obviously constructed while they were all living at the House of Truth starting as early as 1911.  The key inhabitants are the key founding editors. Both the House of Truth and The New Republic are considered widely even today, as being extremely influential in changing the character and definition of liberalism from an interest in individual rights, towards a more centralized, scientifically controlled society.

The New Freedom, published in 1913, was a collated series of speeches Woodrow Wilson admits in the foreword to have never written. Both William Bayard Hale and Louis Brandeis, and Walter Lippmann were well-known speechwriters for Wilson. Within the pages of The New Freedom, ‘Wilson’ warns that “the old order changeth”, while setting a new course for the West, “we are in the presence of a new organization of society”. For the forensic historian, The New Freedom offers one of the most important historical admissions ever, shared below.


From the, not so coincidental publications of progressively minded books, all from the primary leaders of Progressivism to the constant promotion of a large, centralized government and a scientifically managed society. From the many admissions to it all being an experiment, to the connections to the oldest secret societies in America show conclusively, that whether it be a new spirit, a new democracy, a new republic, a new nationalism, a new jurisprudence, a new psychology, a new education, or a new freedom. The New Age was dawning on America.  

When one takes a deeper look, as we at Bulletproof have, its not hard to see the coordinated effort. It doesn’t take much convincing to say that the year 1913, like a photograph, captured a unique and important moment in history. A snapshot showing a deliberate infiltration of all aspects of Western society, those same aspects described some sixty years later, in The Changing Images of Man Study: mystical, cosmological, sociological, pedagogical or psychological, editorial, political and magical. This latest information, when put together with what our previous research has been uncovering, sure paints an impressive mosaic. An aggressively radical social reform movement, all delivered with a religious fervor and a promise to never look back.


You can follow the author at; at The History of Propaganda and Diego Garcia on youtube; and at Bulletproof Publishers on facebook.

Hidden in the Shadow of the Sun

The Political Salons of Los Angeles

For this story we focus on the interwar period following the Treaty of Versailles, showing its effects, and centers on those German and Austrian members of the Weimar who were forced from Germany as the Second World War approached. We enter the next layer of those very famous and influential émigré members of the Weimar who travelled to America, paid for mainly by Rockefeller, Hiram Halle, and Julius Rosenwald as part of the Emergency Committee in Aid of Displaced Foreign Scholars. Of specific interest herein are those most successful, influential, and well-known: Thomas Mann, Lion and Marta Feuchtwanger, Salka and Berthold Viertel, Theodor W. Adorno, Max Horkheimer, and Bertolt Brecht, Fritz Lang and others.

Lion Feuchtwanger

Marta Feuchtwanger

Lion and Marta Feuchtwanger and ‘The Weimar by the Sea’

Built in 1927 the Villa Aurora was originally a demonstration home located at 520 Paseo Miramar in Pacific Palisades. With its panoramic views of Santa Monica Bay, the home was a demonstration home meant to showcase the latest technologies: a gas range, an electric refrigerator, a dishwasher, and a garage door opener. It was one of the very first homes built in the area and today the ‘Weimar by the Sea’ is well hidden, somewhat lost even among the multitude of similarly looking Spanish Villas. In 1943 the home was sold to Lion and Marta Feuchtwanger for a ridiculous, even for that time, $9,000 due to an alleged foreclosure on the property. Both Lion and Marta were instrumental in assisting the emigration of their friend and Lion’s protege, Bertolt Brecht. Brecht was met upon his arrival at San Pedro, Port of Los Angeles by Marta Feuchtwanger. Marta also finding Brecht a place to live.

Lion overlooking the Pacific Palisades before development.

Lion Feuchtwanger was a prominent member of the Weimar and was influential within the intellectual and artistic circles in Los Angeles after arriving in 1941. He was a leading voice for the exiles and was put under FBI surveillance during the McCarthy era. In his influential writing, The Oppermanns, Lion clearly states the exiles modus operandi in its conclusion entitled, ‘Tomorrow’:

“It is upon us to begin the work. It is not upon us to complete it. – Talmud.”

Lion Feuchtwanger while still in France completed the definitive story of Flavius Josephus, entitled, The Day Will Come. Josephus an early advocate of global cosmopolitanism (internationalism, globalism), and the trilogy centers around the, Psalm of the World Citizen. Josephus hoped for a day in the future, as did Feuchtwanger, where internationalism would become a reality. Feuchtwanger’s interest in Favius Josephus and the Fabians being named after Fabius Maximus show a similarity in both method and means.

The Feuchtwanger’s lavish home, with its Mediterranean vistas, became a mecca for European writers, artists, and musicians of all types during the war years. Feuchtwanger’s books, The Wandering Jew(1933), and Jud Suss(1934), were adapted into British sponsored movies by Maurice Elvey and Lothar Mendes respectively. Jud Suss released in America under the title, Power. Both movies starring Conrad Veidt, well established as a leading man within Weimar culture before leaving Europe. In 1941 Veidt would also move to Los Angeles to help persuade American involvement in the Second World War. Veidt’s most famous Hollywood role was as Major Heinrich Strasser in Casablanca(1943). One of the most loved treasures of American cinema, nothing more than a propaganda film. In, Different from the Others (1919), a melodrama co-written by Richard Oswald and ‘the German Alfred Kinsey’, Magnus Hirschfeld. Different from the Others is looked upon by historians as the first ever feature length film aimed at a specifically gay audience and was funded by Hirschfeld’s Institute for Sexual Science.

Feuchtwanger acquired a large collection of the various editions and translations of the works of Flavius Josephus spanning 400 years of printing. Feuchtwanger wrote a trilogy covering the life of Favius Josephus, a Jewish historian of the first century telling of the fall of the Second Temple: Josephus (1932), The Jew of Rome (1935), and The Day will Come (1942). He also had an extensive collection of first editions and secondary works from the French Revolution by Rousseau, Diderot, Condorcet and Helvetius. His collection also includes the first editions of many of the fellow exiles work including Heinrich Mann, Thomas Mann, Ludwig Marcuse, Alfred Doblin, Bruno Frank, Oskar Maria Graf, Franz Werfel, and Arnold Zweig.

Following Lion’s death his wife willed his library collection and personal papers to the University of Southern California, within the Feuchtwanger Memorial Library, housed within the Special Collections of the Doheny Memorial Library. Their ‘castle by the sea’ was eventually sold to the German government and is today controlled and managed by the Villa Aurora Thomas Mann House (VATMH) consortium. Following the death of Marta, their home was repurposed as a study center and is now home of the Villa Aurora Foundation for European American Relations where they offer fellowships and a residency program promoting “transatlantic exchange”. A portion of the Feuchtwanger collection still lives at the Villa Aurora, on permanent loan from the University of California. Marta remained a very influential Los Angeles heiress living at the Villa Aurora for nearly thirty years after her husbands death and continued to promote her husbands work throughout this time.

Students of University of Southern California looking through primary sources.

The Thomas Mann House

Thomas Mann moved to Pacific Palisades in the spring of 1941 and lived at 740 Amalfi Drive, within a hundred meters of Aldous Huxley and his wife at 701 Amalfi Drive. Regular entries within the Thomas Mann diaries tell of regular “visits to the Huxley’s for dinner and tea as well as return invitations from the Manns.” The two couples “met while walking the streets of the nearby hills where the Manns’ future house was being built high up on San Remo Drive, or on the beach in Santa Monica.” When Huxley left for Llano del Rio, their domestic helped was offered and accepted by the Manns.

Mann delivered well over one hundred lectures to at least 60,000 people all over the United States and even Canada during his first lecture tour in the spring of 1938 beginning with his first, on March 23, titled, The Coming Victory of Democracy. The event was held at the Shrine Auditorium in Los Angeles and sponsored by the anti-Nazi League. The Los Angeles Times wrote of the event, “Self-Exiled German Author Sounds Fascism Rebuke”, and many famous emigres attended including William Dieterle, and author Elizabeth Meyer. The lecture at the Shrine was organized by the Hollywood Anti-Nazi League, which used the auditorium for many of their events. The league was formed in 1936 by people from the film industry to fight the fascism [sic] and Nazism. AVTMH Instagram account

Early Zionist, Rabbi Sonderling

Mann was closely associated with Rabbi Sonderling at the First Unitarian Church and the Society for Jewish Culture – Fairfax Temple. Mann was invited to speak several times and Sonderling publicly praised Mann’s tetralogy, Joseph and his Brothers.
“By 1941, when the US entered the war, more than 6,000 German Jews had made it to Los Angeles, making the city the second-largest center of German-speaking Jews in America. An important hub and supporting organization for Jewish art and culture in Los Angeles was the Fairfax Temple and its Rabbi, Jacob Sonderling.” AVTMH

Thomas Mann was a frequent guest at the Villa Aurora and the Feuchtwanger’s were generous hosts and organized readings in Lion’s study. Thomas Mann was the guest of honor and moderator during the German speaking meetings, whereas Charlie Chaplin moderated the English readings. The Mann House was also a “focus of German émigré life in Southern California.” AVTMH

In 1947 Mann wrote, Doctor Faustus and today it “is considered to be one of the most important works of literature produced in the twentieth century.” His famous collaboration with Adorno “a study of music, of genius, of culture and of the political and aesthetic crises of modernism, centering on the nefarious pact the main character, a composer, makes with the devil. For many scholars the devil has become synonymous with the philosophical works of Mann’s collaborator on this project, the German philosopher and social theorist Theodor W. Adorno. The image of Adorno as the devil has continued to fascinate scholars in the decades since the publication of Mann’s novel, resulting in a wide range of critical and interpretive responses.” AVTMH

It is also interesting to note that Mann’s reflection on radio takes place just as Bertolt Brecht publishes several texts dealing with “radio as an apparatus of communication.” AVTMH

With this in mind, in 1941, Thomas Mann regularly contributed to BBC as part of a radio program broadcast back to Germany called German Listeners!, and “the regular broadcasts enabled the exiled writer to politically influence the German population in their mother tongue.”

“The aim was to convince the Americans of a united front against Nazi Germany.” (VATMH)

Thomas Mann broadcasting German Listeners!

NBC Studios photograph via The Thomas Mann House

Mann’s first speeches were broadcast from Princeton where the Princeton Radio Research Project had been underway since 1937 led by fellow émigré Paul Felix Lazarsfeld and around the time Theodor Adorno left the Project for Los Angeles. Lazarsfeld and the Little Annie Project, or the Stanton-Lazarsfeld Program Analyzer was a tool to record the listening habits of radio listeners. This also the same location from where The War of the Worlds was infamously broadcast in 1938 and Stanton an eventual chair at the Rand Corporation.

“What happened in Germany convinced me more and more of the value of Zionism for the Jew.” Thomas Mann.

The Home of Salka and Bertold Viertel

“Los Angeles was as crowded with artists as the renaissance time. It was a sort of harmonic convergence of superstar European intellectuals who found themselves in this environment suddenly not really by their choice, but here they were, and it was Salka Viertel that was what you might think of as the glue that kept this community together.” Donna Rifkind, Remembering the Exiles: Salka Viertel

The Viertel’s were prominent in the early Weimar scene. As early as 1920 Berthold worked with UFA, the German film industry equivalent to Hollywood. Both Berthold and Salka members of the intelligentsia in Weimar. Berthold involved in the early silent era of film in Germany prior to coming to America. His, Joyless Street (1925), Uneasy Money (1926) are works of the New Objectivity film movement neue sachlichkeit. Films in this genre had story lines focused on what were social taboos of the time like abortion, prostitution, homosexuality and addictive personality disorder. This movement fell with that of the Weimar Republic.

Salka Viertel

Eva Herrmann

The Viertel home was an immensely important gathering place for landing emigres, famously hosting the 70th birthday of Heinrich Mann.

Salka Viertel (Salomea Sara Steuermann), was born into a political salon. She grew up in a small town on the edge of the Austro-Hungarian border in Galicia. Her parents were non observant and her father was a wealthy lawyer and the first Jewish mayor of the city in which she was born.  Salka became a prominent actress in German-speaking theatre, and was cast in several starring roles under famous Austrian director Max Reinhardt, born Maximilian Goldmann. Salka toured all the European capitals including Munich, Vienna, Berlin, and Dusseldorf, playing in the many Reinhardt owned Deutsches Theatres across Europe. It is here she met both F.W. Murnau and Ernst Lubitsch. Both actors in Reinhardt’s ensemble.

“Salka’s brother studied with Arnold Schoenberg and as a solo pianist he premiered the composer’s Pierrot lunaire.” (The Shlvi/Hyman Encyclopedia of Jewish Woman)


Berthold Viertel

Eva Herrmann

Eva Herrmann, an exiled painter and illustrator moved to Los Angeles in 1940 and would live within walking distance of both Huxley and Mann. Hermann promoted through her art George Bernard Shaw, Aldous Huxley and Bertolt Brecht and contributed the front cover art for the German, Russian, and English versions of Feuchtwanger’s 1939 novel, Exil. Hermmann, a close friend of the Manns, first joined them in exile in Sanary sur Mer. She would later move not far up the Pacific Coast Highway to Santa Barbara, known colloquially as ‘the American Riviera’, where her home too would become a important gathering place for many German-speaking emigres.

The Weimar culture that was being abolished in Germany for its alleged degeneracies just so happens to be the same type of ‘art’ that Hollywood began producing upon their arrival.

Bertholt Brecht

A famous poet and playwright, Bertholt Brecht worked with Fritz Lang, the director of Metropolis. The two launched their collaboration of Hangmen Also Die! in May of 1942 while on the beach reading The Los Angeles Times’ description of the assassination of Hitler’s hangman, Reinhard Heyrich. For Brecht, the collaboration with Lang was an opportunity to break into the Hollywood scene. The two would take considerable artistic liberty with the actual historical events portrayed in Hangmen Also Die! And like many of the films from this era, are today largely looked upon as propaganda films. By July, Brecht had declared the movie a “dismal fabrication” (Weimar on the Pacific, Erhard Bahr, pg. 135.) Brecht would continue working on the script through September of that year with John Wexley out of the United Artists studio on Las Palmas street in Hollywood, Wexley, an American writer of several film noir crime dramas and the author of the very first anti-Nazi film, Confessions of a Nazi Spy in 1939

BS  Fritz Lang

Fritz Lang moved to Hollywood in 1933 to work for Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer and by ’42 had directed six films, among them Fury (1936), a film about an alleged lynching. Lang was and still is considered a very successful American film director. Lang was a friend of the Brecht family, and had supported Brecht’s immigration with an affidavit and raised funds for his support. Fritz Lang’s, Woman in the Window (1944), along with Billy Wilder’s, Double Indemnity (1944), John Huston’s, The Maltese Falcon (1941), were some of the earliest of the film noir genre in America, and despite the term being first coined in France, the movement can be traced directly back to the Weimar Republic and Fritz Lang’s 1931 film, M.

M, is a story of a serial child murderer and the audience is asked to sympathize with a pedophile unable to control his urges to kill. In the end no verdict is levied. Film historian James Naremore charges that the film noir genre was meant to foment “sympathy for the devil”.

The main objective of film noir was “disorientating the spectator, who can no longer find the familiar reference points”, lost in murky plotlines and the lives of ambiguous lead characters, “the resulting confusion and alienation were an intellectual dilemma that had to be solved.” (Film Noir Reader, Raymond Borde and Etienne Chaumeton)

Essential elements of Film Noir go beyond that of a police documentary, the “dark film” series portrayed consistently the presence of crime. Nino Frank called it “the dynamism of violent death.” Film Noir almost always told from within the criminal forcing the viewer to consider their own morality. If the police are portrayed they are ‘rotten cops’, and sympathy is built around the criminal milieu. “It abandoned the adventure film convention of a fair fight. A sporting chance has given way to settling scores, beatings, and cold-blooded murders.” (Film Noir Reader pg 22.)


Hanns Eisler

Arriving in Los Angeles from New York in 1942, where he was a visiting professor at the New School for Social Research, Eisler would also work with Brecht on many projects in which Brecht authored the poetry or screen play and Eisler contributed the musical score. The Eislers were able to purchase a home on Amalfi near Huxley and Mann due to Hanns’ musical composition on, Hangmen Also Die! Eisler contributed to at least nine feature films while in Los Angeles and “the Eisler’s house became a popular meeting place among European emigres. Theodor Adorno, Bertolt Brecht, Charlie Chaplin, Fritz Kortner, Lion and Marta Feuchtwanger, and the Manns became frequent guests. Eisler, like Mann, ‘acted as mediator between quarreling personalities.’ Brecht and Mann infamous combatants at these gatherings. And as early as 1943 Eisler was under FBI surveillance and was called, “the Karl Marx of music.” AVTMH 

The Dialectic of Enlightenment

Frankfurt School leaders Max Horkheimer and Theodor Ludwig Weisengrund Adorno were also living in the hills of Los Angeles, having both landed first at Columbia University in New York. Horkheimer established the University in Exile at Columbia through negotiations with Abbott Lawrence Lowell, while Adorno worked at Princeton under another Rockefeller émigré Paul Felix Lazarsfeld. Both Horkheimer and Adorno were major figures in the political salon activities and it is their critical theory that proved to be so effective as a dialectic to Western life. They were to use modernism as an entering wedge to create a “societal rupture”, removing Americans from their moorings and anchored tradition as a result. Like Herbert Croly’s, The Promise of American Life was the manifesto for the Progressive movement, or how Huxley’s A Brave New World, Doors of Perception, and The Perennial Philosophy were used to inspire the Human Potential movement and more, The Dialectic of Enlightenment we see being used as a blueprint.

Their critical theory laying the groundwork for all critical theorists to follow. Their book a manifesto. Horkheimer the early director of the Frankfurt School and Adorno a leading figure and eventual director when he returned to Germany. Horkheimer set up The University in Exile, in conjunction with Progressive founding fathers, Charles Beard and James Harvey Robinson. Adorno working at Princeton, where Lazarsfeld in his aformentioned study of radio listening habits first coined the terms, ‘narcotizing dysfunction’, the ‘two step’ and the ‘hypodermic needle flow of communication models’ describing perfectly the mainstream media of today.

Horkheimer and his wife Rose were witnesses at The Mann’s citizenship confirmation. Horkheimer lived “three minutes walking distance from the Mann’s home while finishing The Dialectic of Enlightenment (1947) together with his fellow Frankfurt exile Theodor Adorno, who lived a 10-minute drive away.” AVTMH Instagram

Head of Princeton Radio Research Project, Paul Felix Lazarsfeld.

Robert K. Merton, born Meyer Robert Schkolnick;

Prior to film noir, “the moviegoer [was] accustomed to certain conventions: a logical development of action, a clear distinction between good and evil, well-defined characters, sharp motives, scenes more showy then authentically violent, a beautiful heroine and an honest hero” (Borde and Chaumenton) In film noir however, the moviegoer was confronted with a world that did not conform to his expectations: there were “likeable killers and corrupt cops. Good and evil go hand in hand to the point of being indistinguishable. Robbers become ordinary guys … The victim seems as guilty as the hitman who is just doing his job.” (Border and Chaumeton 25). It was the moviegoer’s task to sort out this confusion – a task similar to that of the observer of epic theater. But while epic theater forced its spectators to make decisions as outside observers, film noir had the moviegoers emotionally involved in the action and inspired “that state of tension instilled in the spectator when the psychological reference points are removed. The aim of film noir was to create a specific alienation.”

(Towards a Definition of Film Noir, Raymond Borde and Etienne Chaumeton, pg. 24,25)

For the film noir era, “the most marked and persistent influence … is surely that of German Expressionism. American horror films owe a huge amount to Caligarism.”

“The motion picture can standardize the ideas and habits of a nation. Because pictures are made to meet market demands, they reflect, emphasize and even exaggerate broad popular tendencies, rather than stimulate new ideas and opinions. The motion picture avails itself only of ideas and facts which are in vogue. As the newspaper seeks to purvey news, it [the motion picture] seeks to purvey entertainment.” Edward Bernays, Propaganda, pg. 156.


“Los Angeles was as crowded with artists as the renaissance time. It was a sort of harmonic convergence of superstar European intellectuals who found themselves in this environment suddenly not really by their choice, but here they were, and it was Salka Viertel that was what you might think of as the glue that kept this community together.” Donna Rifkind, Remembering the Exiles: Salka Viertel

As a result of public outrage at the corrupted storylines, The Hays Code was created as an attempt to regulate the content or subject matter of Hollywood movies. Named after William Harrison Hays Sr., the director of the newly appointed Motion Picture Producers and Distributors of America (MPPDA).  Previously unseen and even unknown concepts like sexual innuendo, sexual perversion, romantic and sexual relationships between white and black people (miscegenation), willful offense to any nation, race, or creed, mild profanity, illegal trafficking of drugs, promiscuity, prostitution, infidelity, abortion, intense violence, and homosexuality were rampant and shocking, all of these topics have become normalized today.

“Special care” was to be used when broaching subjects like: international relations, arson, the use of firearms, theft, robbery, safe-cracking, technique of murder, torture, hangings, sedition, marriage consummation, cruelty to children, deliberate seduction of girls, excessive or lustful kissing and so on. This period coinciding precisely with the influx of German-speaking emigres. But not only that, they were generally practitioners of these behaviours themselves. Many within the Exile circle were bisexual. Huxley’s wife and even Huxley himself seem to have been willing participants.

In the Hays Code, we see in the section, Reasons Underlying the General Principles stated:

“no picture shall be produced which will lower the moral standards of those who see it. Hence the sympathy of the audience should never be thrown to the side of crime, wrong-doing, evil or sin. This is done:

1. When evil is made to appear attractive or alluring, and good is made to appear unattractive.

2. When the sympathy of the audience is thrown on the side of crime, wrong-doing, evil, sin.

The same thing is true of a film that would throw sympathy against goodness, honor, innocence, purity or honesty.”

William Harrison Hays Sr.

Hollywood was always of questionable moral standards and today, as we trace back these less desirable qualities of society, we find their origins go directly back to the film noir era of the early twentieth century. Hollywood itself was meant to degrade Western life from the very beginning and despite all of the efforts to curb degeneracy and depravity from entering Hollywood movies, we see this explicit behaviour increase with the release of movies like: The Moon Is Blue, The Man With The Golden Arm, and Anatomy of a Murder, One Summer of Happiness, Summer with Monika, Suddenly Last Summer, Psycho, Some Like It Hot, Victim, A Taste of Honey, and The Leather Boys. All of these movies challenging existing taboos and traditional gender roles while confronting homophobia, infidelity and adultery. Many of the lead characters in film noir were homosexuals, had addictions, appeared androgynous or were troubled in some way. The movies nudged once controversial topics into the acceptable lexicon through our empathy for the protagonist.

It was a collective assault on the mind, body, and spirit of every American. When we talk about the demoralization of America, this is how it was done. When we talk about them removing our moorings and anchors this is how it was done. The removal of morality through the film noir genre was first made popular in Berlin in the interwar period and then emigrated to Hollywood. The Weimar culture began immediately following the signing of the Versailles Treaty and flourished under the Weimar Republic. They came to America already established in their roles. They were officially intelligentsia. Promoting dalliances, or one-night sexual encounters. It was a “buggers paradise” and even a cursory look into the Weimar and German expressionism we see all kinds of similarities to our Western world today, reminding us through its imagery of movies like Eyes Wide Shut, the rise of MTV culture, sadomasochism, and even bestiality.

Germany was crushed under the Versailles Treaty and German culture and its people quickly fell into chaos due to hyperinflation, starvation and Western occupation. A fifteen-year French occupation of German coal reserves and a reparation package the equivalent of trillions today, meant to be impossible to honour – was written by the Allies.  The Treaty authored vindictively, most likely through the Dulles brothers, was what British economist John Maynard Keynes called a Carthaginian peace. An agreement meant to cripple. A Debellatio.

From this background sprung the Weimar Republic and it is during this time Berlin becomes a cesspool of sexual depravity and excess. Brothels were everywhere and prostitutes numbered in the hundreds of thousands. The tawdry and salacious theatre and plays common at the time inspired various nicknames for Berlin: The Shangra-La by the Spree, The Edge City and Babylon Berlin. We today in the West witness so many similarities to this era of the Weimar, its hard not to make certain connections and wonder if the now even more brutal list of horror and neo-noir movies being released for public consumption aren’t just an extension of this movement, further engraining messages of immorality, absurdity and chaos into the minds of America well over one hundred years after it all began. 

Aldous Huxley in Los Angeles: How Huxley Highjacked Hollywood

By Diego Garcia

How can we call him a great prognosticator of our future world when he was so complicit in the design and execution of it?

Aldous Huxley was born in 1894 to an already prominent English family in the county of Surrey, South East England. Aldous attended Eton and received a Bachelor of Arts at Balliol College, Oxford. His grandfather was Darwin’s bulldog Thomas Henry Huxley and Aldous’ brother Julian an influential internationalist, playing a prominent role in the creation of UNESCO.  Huxley well known as a writer, and social commentator but that only tells a small part of his life’s story, Huxley a high-level grand strategist helped shape Western life in ways few truly comprehend and his face unlikely the first to come up when speaking of a new world order but there is no doubt to what the research says. Huxley was a key player. Huxley entertaining exiles first in Sanary sur Mer and then in the Pacific Palisades, meeting with the authors of critical theory while later steering MKultra doctors Joylon West, Humphry Osmond and others through their work in the fifties. Including the Macy Conferences. Huxley coining the term ‘psychedelic’ with, and receiving his first dose of mescaline from, MKultra doctor Humphrey Osmond(Macy attendee), while Michael Murphy a founder of Esalen called Huxley the seminal inspiration for his Big Sur retreat and from the Esalen Institute we have the Human Potential movement. Esalen in 2016 opening a new conference room called, The Huxley Room. Built on top of the old Huxley room

Aldous Huxley

Darwin’s Bulldog, and Aldous Huxley’s grandfather, Thomas Henry Huxley with one hand hidden. 

Lion Feuchtwanger

Thomas Mann

Brave New World written in the south of France, Sanary-sur-Mer

Huxley wrote A Brave New World nearing the end of the Great Depression while in the South of France. It is there at the same exact time that German-speaking scholars were fleeing Germany prior to the Second World War.  Future owner of the Villa Aurora in Pacific Palisades, Lion Feuchtwanger was there. So too Lion’s close friend and mentor, Bertolt Brecht. Brecht writing of visiting his friend at his “tranquil, white-stuccoed (Sanary)house”, where the “olive groves sloped down to a deep, azure sea.”  is descriptive also of their future home in LA. They knew each other and met often here. And apparently vowed to do the same in America. Almost as if they had planned the dialectical attack on America from a distance. The social science of it all quite astounding. Their critical analysis of the American amounting to a labotomy.

Ludwig Marcuse also said of Sanary the same he would of California, “We were in paradise, against our will.” Thomas Mann stayed at the prestigious Hotel de La Tour while in Sanary-sur-Mer. While there against their will they sure remained prolific, Feuchtwanger contributing three novels during his stay and Thomas Mann finishing the third of his trilogy on the genesis of Judaism and the stories of Jacob and Joseph.

Huxley and The Exilliteratur

Upon arrival in Hollywood in 1937, Huxley tried his hand at screenwriting for at least three films: Pride and Prejudice, Jane Eyre, and Alice in Wonderland. And many exiles followed. As we’ve pointed to in our previous article, The Exilliteratur included several key members of the Frankfurt School, followers of Marx, Hegel , and Freud, and vehement detractors of the very American culture industry Freud and his grandson played a major role in creating.

Men like Max Horkheimer and Theodor Adorno first came here on Rockefeller and Halle and Rosenwald money as part if the Emergency Committee in Aid of Foreign Displaced Scholars, and shared a special, somewhat secretive collaborative relationship with Huxley while all living in the same Pacific Palisades area of Los Angeles. It is here they conspired, yes conspired, in the political salons to the various ways Huxley could bring his passions to life. This where they planned the dialectic of modernism using ‘California Modern’ and as Leary states of the several ‘cells’ being employed during that time, the agents in Los Angeles did more for the movement than anyone else and did so “in a cool, laid back way’.

Their nearly simultaneous arrival in the hills of Los Angeles tells of a deliberate plan, coordinated prior to arrival. This conclave of exiles would meet Aldous at the political salon home of Bertold and Salka Viertel (born Salomea Sara Steuermann) at 165 North Mabery Road in Santa Monica. The Viertel’s known intelligentsia prior to coming to California. It is here we find a confluence of interesting people, Ava Gardner an athiest, Charles Laughton a well-known homosexual in Hollywood, Huxley’s wife and most likely Huxley himself bisexual fitting into this coterie of homosexuality at a time when society still frowned upon such things. This Los Angeles circle participating in real-life ‘feelies’, and promoting the practice of promiscuity.

Salka Viertel

Viertel’s Political Salon

Viertel’s home interior.

You can tell a lot by the friends you keep and the Huxley’s were surrounded by a major cast of shady characters. The Huxley’s swingers, as I suppose social experimenters would and at times Aldous’ wife Maria would procure young woman for these purposes.

Maria from the Bloomsbury Set we showed to have influence in the creation of the League of Nations as did Huxley with Club 1917. Another friend was Mabel Dodge Luhan, the Greenwich Village salonniere who happened to be close friends with Walter Lippmann. Huxley’s Los Angeles Circle included Jiddu Krishnamurti, Edwin Hubble, Charlie Chaplin, Paulette Goddard and Mercedes de Acosta, a screenwriter and like Salka, an intimate of Greta Garbo. The Huxley’s even visiting Manly P. Hall at his home for dinner on at least one occasion.

Huxley and the 60’s Counterculture

Huxley’s Doors of Perception inspired Jim Morrison to name his Los Angeles rock band, The Doors. Few would argue this, but the Doors of Perception also pointed to as the ultimate inspiration for more than just Mr. Mojo Risin’, it really sparking the entire 60’s counterculture movement. Several of Huxley’s writings served as inspiration including: Heaven and Hell, The Perennial Philosophy, Brave New World and the first Modernist novel, Chrome Yellow. This all admitted by a room full of complicit characters during a get together at the home of Oscar Janiger, a meeting where Timothy Leary, Sidney Gottlieb, Sidney Cohen, Humphry Osmond, and Al Hubbard were all present. Al Hubbard, an intelligence member of at least two governments, running LSD experiments out of Hollywood Hospital in the Vancouver British Columbia suburb of New Westminster during the same time.

Morrison, the archetype for the psychedelic counterculture movement and son of Stephen Morrison, the rear admiral in charge of United States Naval forces on the USS Bon Homme Richard, the flag ship of the 3rd Fleet Carrier Division during the Tonkin Gulf incident – the very false-flag event that initiated the Vietnam War. Jim famous for many things but his family relations have remained largely obscured in the back books of history. And, in perhaps the Doors’ most famous song, The End, we hear Morrison at his most brooding and pugilistic, and it is through his disturbing storytelling nearing the end of the song, in which Jim introduces Freud’s oedipal complex to an entire generation of youth, the idea of killing your father and raping your mother into the mainstream. Moving the Overton window to include taboos just as Bernays.

The USS Bonne Homme Richard was officially decommissioned on July 2, 1971. One day later on July 3, 1971, Jim Morrison would die of ‘heart failure’ despite no autopsy to signal the official end of the 60’s. People are strange indeed.

“The killer awoke before dawn, he put his boots on. He took a face from the ancient gallery and he walked on down the hall! He went into the room where his sister lived and then he … he paid a visit to his brother and then he …  walked on down the hall! … And he came to a door and he looked inside. Father? Yes son, I want to kill you. Mother? I want to … the act then portrayed instrumentally, in a wild and jarring crescendoed acid jazz melee until repeating to the end, Come on baby take a chance with us, take a ride on the back of the blue bus.”

Morrison during his time in Laurel Canyon, living within walking distance of both the Huxley home and the famous propaganda military base at Lookout Mountain now owned by Jerad Leto. And there are several mythical stories in which his bandmates and friends would say Jim would go for a walk and come back with a song. Was he being directed by the military just as his dad was, acting as a walking dialectic to war, provided solace, psilocybin and a place to ride out the storm?


Huxley inspires Esalen and the Human Potential Movement

It is no secret that Huxley was the seminal inspiration for Esalen and the infusion of Hindu mysticism into the United States, he and his ‘perennial philosophy’ playing a massive role in the New Age movement as many of those ground soldier gurus proved to be members of U.S. intelligence communities. Like in the case of the Viertel’s, we see these American figures as devoted members of American intelligentsia.

Those proselyzing hallucinogenics to the masses, those most remembered were all sharing zero degrees of separation with the CIA, Wall Street and the Council on Foreign Relations. Men like Ken Kesey, who wrote One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest, Alan Ginsberg, Terrence McKenna, Timothy Leary, Henry Luce and Gordon Wasson(JP Morgan vice president of public relations and founder of the magic mushroom), all working directly with intelligence. Men like Allen Dulles, the head of the CIA at this time, and an author of the Treaty of Versailles thirty years previous.

Time LIfe owner Henry Luce published Wasson’s findings and promoted the use of LSD through his massive media conglomerate. Time Life also the home of military intelligence propagandist Charles Douglas Jackson. Jackson literally working for the psychological warfare division and the first to report the concentration camps following World War II, along with Hollywood director, Billy Wilder. For those really following along you are being rewarded here, CD Jackson deserving of an entire story himself, the curator of the Zapruder film we never saw before it was edited and locked away in the vaults of Time Life.

Even Playboy magazine got in on the promotion of LSD popularizing it in three separate editions read by the exact demographic they were targeting. The pre adolescents and young adults. All of these admissions and more await the reader in the hour long video provided within the body of this article above that substantiates every claim made herein and more.

Esalen founder Michael Murphy with Aldous Huxley

Jeffrey J. Kripal, chair of Esalen’s Board of Trustees and author of Esalen: America and the Religion of No Religion, wrote of Huxley’s Esalen connection:

“Aldous Huxley’s writings on the mystical dimensions of psychedelics and on that he called the perennial philosophy were foundational. Moreover, his call for an institution that could teach the ‘nonverbal humanities’ and the development of the ‘human potentialities’ functioned as the working mission statement of early Esalen. Indeed the very first Esalen brochures actually bore the Huxley-inspired title, “the human potentiality.”

The Esalen human potential legacy centres around Huxley and his close friend Gerald Heard, and Chris Isherwood. Heard arriving in Los Angeles with Huxley, and Isherwood joining shortly thereafter. Together, Kripal added, they “would eventually have a major impact on the American countercultural appropriation of Hinduism.”

Gerald Heard, Aldous Huxley, Al Hubbard (Captain Trips, the Johnny Appleseed of LSD)


Little remains to be said, what we witness is an all out frontal assault on all aspects of Western society, all instituted at the same time and the whole agenda manipulated by the very author of A Brave New World(!)

Huxley like the Grinch overlooking Whoville, had no heart, Huxley and the Grinch both having hearts two sizes too small and while the Grinch finally saw the error of his ways, Huxley did not, Huxley’s heart as cold and calculating as a clinician to the end, as one would expect of any reputable social scientist or high level grand strategist. This one recurring theme and pattern is something we see throughout our research, in every aspect, and further speaks to their demoralization programme.

I refer you back to Walter Lippmann’s words in Liberty and the News and found in Future Perfect Part 1, where he claimed, the ever growing more complex world was unfit to be run by those who knew the difference between right and wrong and Huxley seems to concur wholeheartedly, this theory of overcomplication something Huxley based his life’s work on.

Huxley’s Club 1917 friend Virginia Woolf creatively described him as “infinitively long” and “that gigantic grasshopper.” According to his biographer Aldous’ head was so large he never walked until he was two. Huxley’s nickname as a child was ‘Ogie’, because some thoughtful child claimed he resembled an Ogre. (Los Angeles Stories: Aldous Huxley’s Mystical Los Angeles, the Philosophical Research Society).

Esalen worked on a spiritual level, while MKultra was the pharmacological. Huxley’s work with the Exilliteratur to alter the intellectual realm. MKultra didn’t end it became mainstream, the progenitor or precursor to the Stanford Research Institute’s, Changing Images of Man Study beginning not long after Huxley’s death in the 1970’s and the rise of the pharmaceutical industry followed. See our article, The Changing Images of Man, at A study in which Huxley and his brother are cited as well as behaviourists, B.F. Skinner and Hero’s Journey author, Joseph Campbell a participant.

Huxley’s work with German-speaking Marxists in exile yet another aspect of society he had his boney alien fingers on. The intellectual or scholarly minded needed necessarily to be affected as well. With the Marxist doctrine we see now prevalent throughout American academia we have no one else to thank but the very founders of critical theory and Huxley. The culmination of Huxley’s influence and his many fascinations being exercised in this one most influential of American cities.

Their plan was to demoralize, to remove us from our established moorings, and then to replace religion with ‘the religion of no religion’.  Esalen founded in 1963, some ninety-three years after Aldous’ grandfather Thomas Henry Huxley first coined the term, ‘agnostic’.


Esalen Institute at Big Sur

left to right: Gerald Heard, Christopher Isherwood, Julian Huxley, Aldous Huxley, and Linus Pauling at the home of Aldous. Wouldn’t the Hollywood sign in the background be a much better shot?

The brand new Huxley Room at Esalen. Completed 2016.

Steffie Nelson wrote in, Brave New LA: Aldous Huxley in Los Angeles:

“I would argue that it wasn’t until Huxley moved to America — specifically, to Los Angeles — that the seeds of his lifelong fascinations with technology, pharmacology, the media, mysticism and spiritual enlightenment fully blossomed and bore fruit. It’s often said “The Sixties” officially began with the death of JFK and America’s “loss of innocence.” But without the dedicated and well-documented cosmic explorations of Aldous Huxley and his cohorts, the decade would have looked very different. It’s not an exaggeration to say that, without Huxley, Timothy Leary might never have tuned in and turned on, and Jim Morrison might never have broken on through.”

The only difference of opinion between us and that of Steffie Nelson is one of intent and scale.  I can’t help but see when looking at Aldous Huxley, living in his home underneath the Hollywood sign, looking down on LA as the Grinch did over Whoville as a major social engineer of the highest qualifications. The mainstream account of Huxley so far from reality he is considered a master of prognostication. And while the hearts of those witnessing Huxley’s handiwork today undoubtedly will be when hearing some of this mangled up and tangled up in knots, it remains the indefatigable goal of ours to wake those Whos still asnooze.

Huxley had his hands in every aspect of Western society at the place trends are created and the cool people reside and this investigation will remain open as his actions now warrant it. We can no longer look at Huxley as a social predictor of the future. His deep involvement now obscured by fifty years of transcendental mysticisms and philosophical potentialities floating in the ether, acting as a smokescreen for one of the architects of our modern day conundrum. He has been the primary player in the creation of our world that now looks like the past. Huxley, without a doubt, was one of the most important influencers in new world order movement.

Look for future work in this area as we look to close the circle on Aldous Huxley. If you find this information valuable as we do, you can support and encourage our future work here, on our bulletproof website. Follow the author at TriviumMethod on twitter, on youtube at The History of Propaganda and at

A Brave New World from UK archives looks today like the past.

Word Games

My intention initially was to put these images up to serve the purpose of sharing them with fellow researchers. I’ve since recognized the importance of a contextual introduction, as well as the key points to the importance of word games in our path to collect the neccessary pieces to our own awakening.

On this path one will encounter the very neccessary measure of the study of cryptography, encryption techniques, ciphers, etymology, specifically in relation to the english language. The nature of our benevolent chessmasters requires that they too stay within the confines of their beliefs and rituals. We have discovered over the years of their love of mockery, which often is deployed via games. And what do we have here? Word games. What seems like simple fun with words on the exterior, holds within an encrypted message which forms the true meaning of the use of the word.

As we investigate into our history and the use of words, researchers today often draw on the Judaic expression of gematria, or the use of words to mask numbers whose calculations often reveal the true meaning of the word. These ciphers when decoded often lead to additional puzzles as they are just clues, smaller parts of a larger agenda.

Gematria: along with teinuyah, was the science of the dual interpretation of the Kabalistic alphabet, which composed the notary art, which is fundamentally the complete science of the tarot (q.v.) signs and their complex and varied application to the definition of all secrets. Encyclopedia Of Ancient And Forbidden Secrets

The study of word games, its uses and rules, gives additional paramater sets to help solve more complex ideas/meanings hidden within the word/sentence that cannot be resolved simply through the use of numerical value representation. These word and sentence structures, coupled with the use of numerical value ciphers, are taking decoding to the next level.

Much like creating formulas for solving problems, a hypothesis is created. From this certain parameters are established that help formulate the intial expression. In this expression are applied past knowns, which in a true/false testing method help to deduce a formula that proves the past as true. From this can be derived the unknowns of the future, and knowing the formula in play, can simply be plugged in by variables and solved like any other algebraic expression.

In the mind this is much easier then on paper. In time, my hope is to show a sample of this in both formats so as to assist fellow researchers in decoding the truths they seek. My apologies if this blog finds you perplexed, but I assure you it will be only momentary.

Frequency, Orthographic Regularity, and Lexical Status in Letter and Word Perception

August, 1980

Technical Report No. 550

Wisconsin Research and Development Center for Individualized Schooling
The University of Wisconsin
Madison, Wisconsin

Sponsoring AGENCY:  National Inst. of Education (ED), Washington, DC.

IDENTIFIERS *Orthographic Stricture

A study assessed the role of orthographic structure in college students’ perceptual recognition and judgment of letter strings. Lexical status, word frequency, bigram frequency, log bigram frequency, and regularity of letter sequencing were orthogonally varied across a series of experiments. Six – letter words and their
anagrams were used as test stimuli in a target-search task. Results showed that words were recognized better than their corresponding equally well-structured anagrams, but that word frequency had little effect. Orthographically regular anagrams were recognized better than irregular anagrams, whereas log bigram frequency did not have an effect. In contrast, post hoc correlations revealed that log bigram frequency did correlate significantly with individual item performance. In a final experiment, subjects judged which of a pair of letter strings most resembled English in terms of either the frequency or the regularity of letter sequences. Findings revealed an influence of essentially the same dimensions of orthographic structure as that revealed by the perceptual recognition task. The overall results provided evidence for lexical status, regularity of letter sequencing, and frequency of letter sequencing as important dimensions in the psychologically real description of orthographic structure. (Author/FL)


Did you read that? Wow. 😮 Lexical status(word games), letter sequencing (lexicology,anagrams/acrostics/palindromes/etc.), and frequency (word games with numbers[ think Gematria] + [verbal vagaries] = REAL PSYCHOLOGICAL DESCRIPTION

This is what I see: the overall results indicated that the structure of words and its many variations had affects beyond that of their apparent intentions or meaning. In plain English; It is not what it appears, words for humans are like code programs and can be used to stimulate a desired psychological reaction.

This is the very reason why this study is immediately relevant to everyone, because understanding these concepts will help readers re-evaluate how they understand what they are reading or seeing. [Decoding the ciphers hidden in every day life, intended for the initiated.]

It is widely acknowledged that the reader contributes as much or more to reading than does the “information” on the printed page. One compelling issue in reading research is how the reader’s higher-order knowledge of the language interacts with lower-level perceptual analyses during reading.

What? Point and Case. This case is now considered in the bag.

“higher-order knowledge of the language interacts with lower-level perceptual analyses during reading.”

It just doesn’t get more obvious than that. If I were a magician, I’d be an English speaking magician, because it’s the easiest language to manipulate with. Note below how there are two separate yet simultaneous processes going on. Stuff is going into storage before primary recognition has even been initiated. Do you think understanding this formula, could play into someone wishing to excercise control over another?

Information could be injected into storage memory before recognition, not get computed but then get comingled into the final part of rehersal and recoding, resulting in a false reading, ie, meaning. A false meaning is resolved, and no one even blinked an eye. Understanding this topology map is a technical advancement beyond my words of expression. This very technology is being deployed on what’s today called the “dumbed down masses”, all without anyone even noticing despite it being right under our noses.

Why are word games important?

Remember the newest variants, just when you thought they couldn’t beat it over the head anymore, but they just kept on trucking like they weren’t caught with their pants down. The list below will be updated as things come up, but you will see a pattern emerge.


SOCIAL DISTANCING Anagram SCOLIA DISCANTING (2. A discussion or discourse on a theme/narrative)

Sco·​lia ˈskōlēə
: a genus (the type of the family Scoliidae) of wasps that build or dig no nest but lay their eggs on the bodies of the burrowing larvae of various beetles


THE science of numbers is of remotest antiquity. Among the Aryans and Greeks, the Assyrians and Egyptians, we find indications of a development which gave to numbers their real significance and employed them in a system of symbolism which had respect to something more than mere enumeration.
While it is true that a figure is a symbol denoting a quantity, it is also a fact that a quantity thus symbolised may denote much more than a mere number, as we may learn from chemical analysis, where two bodies consisting of an equal number of atoms of the same elements are of an entirely different chemical nature. This is the case as between phenylisocyanide and benzonitrile. But here we have a difference in the arrangement of the atoms, the single atom of nitrogen being active in the one and passive in the other molecule. The position serves, however, for a general thesis which regards all bodies as compounded of elements drawn from a single base, their specific differences being due to the domination of one over another element in them. The astrologers affirm that individual character answers to a similar analysis, for whereas all men are constituted from the same cosmic forces, one has more of Saturn in him than others, being born under the dominance of that planet, while another has more of the nature of Mars, on account of its ascendancy or elevation at his birth, corresponding differences of character being observable in them, the one being ponderous, melancholic and taciturn, the other energetic, enterprising and demonstrative. Man, in fine, is a modification of cosmic elements, a composite of cosmic forces, like any other body. But also something more. Behind the coloured glass there is always the light. The intelligence striking through the composite of personal organisation reveals itself as character.
Similarly, behind the cosmos there is an Intelligence which manifests to us through cosmic elements as Nature. God geometrises, and in Nature we have the geometrical expression of the Divine Intelligence. Crystallisation takes place according to definite laws. All the superior metals crystallise at the angle or complemental angle of a regular polygon, which may be inscribed in a circle; and these angles are those which are indicated by the astral science as operative. Water, which the ancients referred to in a mystical sense as the mother of all things, their material base, crystallises at an angle of 60 degrees. The universe is but the crystallised ideation of God; it is a divine thought form. It is by the study of numbers, therefore, that we may learn the laws of divine expression, from the constitution of the universe down to the most trivial occurrence in its evolutional progress. What we call an event is but a displacement and rearrangement of the parts of our sphere of reality. Changes taking place in the cosmos are accompanied by changes in all its constituents, and these changes may converge to a cataclysm. They may also produce a shower of rain, an epidemic, or a rise of a penny per cent in the price of wheat. Admitting man’s relations to the cosmos, and it would be difficult to deny them, there is really no end to the concatenation of effects which may arise from any single cosmic disposition, as, for instance , when our earth lies in the diameter of the Martian sphere of influence.
In the study of numbers, therefore, we are not concerned with figureology, or mere symbolism, but with quantities and geometrical relations. This study has its principles, its alphabet, its language and terminology, and its signification. In the course of these pages I shall endeavour to show that there is a signification attaching to numbers which for lack of a better term I must call occult ; for although it would be a comparatively easy matter to trace a relationship existing between man and the universe, it would be by an argument of a mystical nature only that any connection between numbers and events could be traced. Yet, if I show that this connection exists, there will be at least sufficient ground on which to establish such an argument, from which, possibly, might arise a deeper understanding and wider appreciation of that ancient key to the mysteries of the universe which was rediscovered and partially formulated by Baron Swedenborg in the Doctrine of Correspondences. In this doctrine, Matter is the ultimate expression of Spirit, as Form is that of Force. Therefore, for every spiritual Force there is a corresponding material Form. The whole of Nature thus becomes an expression of the underlying spiritual world, and its physiognomy is to us the chiefest source of inspiration. The laws governing this expression are traceable only in terms of numbers, t.e. of geometrical ratios. The moral sense is only a subconscious recognition of the integrity and harmony of natural laws, a reflex of the greater environment. There is an analogy between the laws of Matter and those of Mind. They may arise from a common cause. The science of numbers is the key to both.

Name of  Encryption Technology: Palindromatic Code

Keyword Connector: Palindrome

Cipher Sequence: Toroidal, Toric Geometry

This Palindromatic Code geometry is embedded into everything including language, I suspect. Examining the code and knowing that Palindromes are words that are the same written forward as well as backwards, we can see how it correlates immediately. If you plot the prime gaps onto a radius and plot, it creates arches which connect at prime numbers. If you lay the negative space of the arches onto a radius and circle the radii, the toric geometry arises organically within prime and compostie quanities. The Palindromatic Code is embedded into the structure of space time, scalably so these same geometries (Toric Geometries) can be found within atoms or between galaxies depending on the magnitude your looking at. Basically, your overlapping, turning, and plotting intersects. This is the cipher of language, here’s the hypothesis. 

Toric Geometry governs all reality including language, thusly when we take language and turn it into numerical values we can use the cipher to decode, predict, or create depending on the intention of the sentence.




Frequency, Orthographic Regularity, and Lexical
Status in Letter and Word Perception. Technical
Report No. 550


Encyclopedia Of Ancient And Forbidden Secrets


The word circus : a letter-perfect book 1998 – Books To Borrow [Login Req]


A cypher within a cypher; being a curious, or novel, discovery, with an illustrative description, of an anagram, in the biliteral characters, of the name, William Shakespeare, covertly infoulded within another infoulded cypher in Francis Bacon’s original London folio edition of De augmentis scientiarum, & published, notably, at the same time as the first folio edition of the immortal plays.