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)

Conclusion

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 bulletproofpub.com. 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 bulletproofpub.com

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

The Future Perfect Pt. 1 From the Paris Peace Conference…

By Diego Garcia

“I call this lecture ‘From Versailles to Cybernetics,’ naming the two historic events of the twentieth century. The word ‘cybernetics’ is familiar, is it not? But how many of you know what happened at Versailles in 1919?”

Gregory Bateson, lecture at the Two Worlds Symposium, Sacramento State College, April 21, 1966.

On August 1, 1917 as the world was reeling from the horrors of its very first war, Pope Benedict XV published, A Note to the Heads of All Belligerent Peoples. Benedict’s message, published in every major paper around the world, called for an end to the prolonged ‘massacre’. Benedict proposing ‘more moderate forms of counsel’, ‘calm deliberations’, and a collective move towards a ‘just and lasting peace’.   The Pope’s letter hoping to initiate a radical global shift away from the settling of disputes by the traditional, ‘material force of arms’, and towards a new international, ‘moral force of law’.

While the American president took almost a month to reply publicly, it was a much different story privately as three days later, on the third anniversary of Great Britain’s declaration of war on Germany, Felix Frankfurter, special counsel for the State Department, sent his now infamous memorandum from London recommending, “a bureau be established for the study and preparation of those questions which appear likely to be proposed at the Peace Conference.”  Wilson quickly forming an American bureau of international experts, hand-picked from the most prominent of Ivy League universities and charged with finding a solution to the traditional horrors of material war. A group soon to be known as the Inquiry. Their preparatory work beginning immediately in the back rooms of the New York Public Library and was to align with the work already being undertaken by the British and French.

Frankfurter, working hand in hand with the British and French foreign offices shows his involvement in the very earliest efforts to align American post war interests with that of her main allies. According to Inquiry historian Lawrence Gelfand, the Inquiry social engineers were creating more than a blueprint. They were building a foundation upon which the cyberneticians of the Macy Conferences would build an institution of mind control a generation later.

The Inquiry Intelligence Chiefs

“Treaty of Versailles was an attitudinal turning point.” Gregory Bateson

 

The Inquiry’s influence in Paris incalculable in that they are the authors of much of our modern-day one world monolith. The Inquiry representing the first ad hoc, interdisciplinary group of social science engineers, setting the stage in Paris for nothing less than what Bateson himself described as, one of the great sell outs in the history of our civilization”.  Bateson describing Wilson as a “pathologically trusting man” suggesting him a front who allowed himself to be swept up in the current of progressive idealism. Wilson allowing himself to become emotively persuaded by private scholars and diplomats – ‘entering wedges’ – used as tools to usurp the State Department’s own presidential advisory authority in one of history’s most obvious, yet oddly obscure, coup d’états.

 

“The Peace Treaty was not to be a return to the old diplomacy, but the establishment of a new world order.” James T. Shotwell, Inquiry member and author of, At the Paris Peace Conference, pg. 13.

“For five years, there has been no free play of public opinion in the world. Confronted by the inexorable necessities of war, governments conscripted public opinion … They goose-stepped it. They taught it to stand at attention and salute … It sometimes seems that after the Armistice was signed, millions of Americans must have taken a vow that they would never again do any thinking for themselves. They were willing to die for their country, but not willing to think for it.” Frank I. Cobb, editor New York World, excerpt from Liberty and the News, pg. 8.

The Manufacturing of Public Consent and The Entering Wedge

The story of the Inquiry certainly offering extraordinary historical precedent to anyone willing to think for themselves today as the quotes above sounding ominously reminiscent of our modern-day fake news reality. Just as today we may be forever waiting for a return to normal, those living then died waiting for a promised end to all war. The contemporary Western democratic world not led by election or choice, but by persuasion.  All the men of the Inquiry, just as the members of the later Macy Conferences, were deliberately recruited for their political and social science backgrounds. Nearly every member with an Ivy League Master’s degree in the liberal arts, all holding an Atlanticist worldview, all with a cosmopolitan, liberally progressive social conscience, and all sharing a common belief that, the technical expert, in an ever more complex and changing world, was essential in the guidance of the Greater Society.  This technique of manufacturing the public’s consent towards predetermined State goals already proven effective in persuading America into a war they had previously voted against. An astonishing American volte face the result of an extraordinarily well coordinated State sponsored propaganda campaign. A psychological operation on the minds of the American public.

A State sponsored psychological operation Walter Lippmann, James T. Shotwell, Felix Frankfurter, and the father of propaganda, Edward Bernays, all participated in. They worked directly with zero degrees of separation for the newly minted government propaganda division, the Committee on Public Information. The CPI founded by Executive Order 2594 on April 13, 1917 and under the direction of George Creel, Robert Lansing (Secretary of State), Newton D. Baker (Secretary of War), and Josephus Daniels (Secretary of Navy). Modern American propaganda is born from the embers of the first world war and George Creel, Walter Lippmann, Edward Bernays, three faces of the Propagandists Mt. Rushmore were there, in Paris, working together, shaping public opinion on an international level.

So, as much as the credit for the invention of propaganda is often given to the likes of Joseph Goebbels, these three Americans, and most especially Lippmann and Bernays above all, became the actual masters of manufacturing consent. Interesting to note reader that both Lippmann’s ground-breaking Public Opinion (1922) and Bernays’, Crystallizing Public Opinion (1923), published within months of each other are currently enjoying their one-hundred-year anniversary. Together these two books set the direction of public relations for the next century and the manufacturing of consent a phrase as well known to the coiner of the term as it was to the pioneering cyberneticians of the 1940’s like Norbert Weiner and Gregory Bateson.  It can not be overstated, as this concept the foundation upon which the entire scheme of public manipulation was made possible.

If you’ve been following our previous work, you know Walter Lippmann as a founding member of the Inquiry and a Council on Foreign Relations lifetime board member. He is also largely lauded by professors of media studies as “the father of modern American journalism.” Lippmann inventing the term, “manufacture of consent” in his, Liberty and the News, published in the year immediately following his involvement at the Paris peace conference:  

“Everywhere to-day men must deal with questions more intricate than any church or school had prepared them to understand. Increasingly they know that they cannot understand them if the facts are not quickly and steadily available. Increasingly they are baffled because the facts are not available; and they are wondering whether government by consent can survive in a time when the manufacture of consent is an unregulated private enterprise pg. 4,5 Liberty and the News

“The Great Society had grown so furiously and to colossal dimensions by the application of technical knowledge. It was made by engineers who had learned to use exact measurements and quantitative analysis. It could not be governed, men began to discover, by men who thought deductively about rights and wrongs. It could be brought under human control only by the technic which had created it.” Walter Lippmann, Public Opinion, Chapter 25, pg. 370, The Entering Wedge,  

The manufacturing of public consent by unregulated private enterprise certainly nothing new to us living in the 21st century – Lippmann and company’s, children of the future. The necessary business of steering public opinion towards a more noble, liberal vision of the future Lippmann often referred to throughout his career as, The Great Society. These social engineers had privately determined that an attitude change of the entire world was necessary while any public questioning of the scheme’s morality was not.  This great reset of one hundred years ago the technological schemata to which Lippmann dedicated his entire sixty-year career. Lippmann the owner of one of the longest syndicated columns in the history of journalism entitled, Today and Tomorrow. Note the very progressive sounding name, and the subtle absence of Yesterday. The memory hole founded and Lippmann one of those most influential in the steering of society towards a tomorrow we today now see quickly approaching on the horizon.

In chapter 25 of Public Opinion Lippmann writes of applying the social science technical expert as the entering wedge – Driven deliberately “between the private citizen and the vast environment in which he is entangled”. An eminence grise man of letters with no moral agency wielding facts and statistics as if they were weapons. Members of the Inquiry pioneers in these fields of facts, stats, and numbers, many becoming immensely effective in Statecraft and are to be considered the very forefathers to the cybernetics breakthrough to follow. The story of the Inquiry and that of the initial Macy Conferences nearly identical. Both groups were made of social scientists hired as special aides to assist in the scientific management of society. Experts in their respective fields of human study: sociology, history, economics, anthropology, human geography, psychology. Both groups of social and political scientists heavily funded by Rockefeller, Carnegie, and Ford foundations. Although separated by two decades both served similarly as effective counsel in the government of government, the understanding of understanding and in discovering the human use of human beings. Here it becomes very important to take note of the definitions of both cybernetics and, government:

government: guvernere: to govern; to steer or control as a pilot would a ship.
mens or mentis: the mind.

cybernetics: from the Greek kubernetes: to steer as would the helmsman of a ship; a governor.

The Inquiry and the League of Nations

The Inquiry worked with several interests in forging the Covenant of the League of Nations. As we discuss these groups below we begin to uncover overlapping memberships between each of these groups and with several elite social clubs. These secretive relationships, made in the Gentlemen’s Clubs of Washington and New York at places like: the Century Club, the Metropolitan Club, the Cosmopolitan Club, and the broader, more internationally minded, Pilgrims Society, make clear just where foreign policy is first developed.  These underreported memberships also prominent throughout the entire American Delegation, the Big Four Nations, and thus, the entire Peace Conference itself. This seemingly systemic unwillingness on the behalf of the media to report such important information a gross negligence of duty casting shade on every historians and journalist since.

  1. The Bryce Group: founded in London, 1914. Named after its chairman, the Scottish liberal and 1st Viscount, James Bryce (privy council to the Queen, Royal Society fellow, British Academy, House of Lords). Bryce, the Ambassador to the United States and the author of the widely read, The American Commonwealth in 1888. Bryce aided in the book’s popularity throughout American academic circles by his close friendship with American aristocracy, including one of the most supportive in Harvard phi beta kappa president, Charles W. Eliot. Bryce’s, The American Commonwealth important in the promotion of history told through an Anglo-American worldview and played an important role in a long awaited British and American alliance.  Bryce, it should be noted, was the actual author of the very report that provoked the first world war in the first-place by publishing, The Committee on Alleged German Outrages – now seen as a highly suspect, largely fictitious example of black propaganda. The Bryce Group inspirational in the creation of The League of Nations Society. James Bryce and his committee, while willing the war into reality on made up field reports, were conveniently present to pick up the pieces. Problem, reaction, solution.

1st Viscount James Bryce

2. The League to Enforce Peace: founded in Philadelphia, 1915, based on Theodore Roosevelt’s much earlier call for an international “League of Peace”. Roosevelt himself phi beta kappa and a Freemason. Roosevelt’s very protégé William Howard Taft, was elected President of the League to Enforce Peace. Taft, the 27th president of the United States after Roosevelt and the son of the very founder of Skull and Bones, also tapped phi beta kappa, also a freemason. Another founding member of the League to Enforce Peace was Elihu Root, Skull and Bones, phi beta kappa, Secretary of War at the turn of the century under both McKinley and Roosevelt. Root modernized the military, was a founder of the Preparedness movement and was president of Carnegie Endowment for World Peace. Another founder of the LEP was Henry Stimson, strangely enough also Skull and Bones, also phi beta kappa, also a founder of the Preparedness Movement, and the most proficient Secretary of War holding portfolio under Taft, FDR, Truman, and Herbert Hoover. Other LEP notables include founder and chairman of their executive committee, A. Lawrence Lowell. Lowell president of Harvard, and phi beta kappa. Richard T. Ely, an influential Progressive Era leader, advocate for Preparedness and “father of land economics,” also a founder of the LEP. Alexander Graham Bell and Zionist delegate in Paris, Rabbi Stephen Wise also founders.

* Note how both the Pilgrims and the CFR have the word ‘ubique’, meaning everywhere, in their logo.

3. The League of Nations Union: founded in New York 1918, a merger between the League of Free Nations Association and the League of Nations Society. Here we see a confluence of leaders from both sides of the Atlantic merging into one entity led by its first president, British Foreign Office Secretary Sir Edward Grey. The League of Nations Society founded by the founder of the National Birth Control Association, Margery Spring-Rice and its membership filled with authors who were writing books, pamphlets and other literature promoting the ideas of the Bryce Group. Within this milieu we have identified as members of the Executive Committee an interesting array of representatives of those organizations most in control of our society today.

The ‘apostle of internationalism’ Stephen Duggan. Harvard Law School handler of Frankfurter, Brandeis and Lippmann, Billings Learned Hand. JP Morgan counsel Thomas W. Lamont. Zionist leaders and fellow Harvard Law alumni, Felix Frankfurter and Julian Mack. Inquiry members David Hunter Miller, Edward Slosson, Edwin Gay and Alvin Johnson all members. Frank Walsh’s inclusion interesting in that he was chosen to head the failed investigation (the Walsh Commission), into the unlawful and inhumane labor relation practices of the tax-exempt foundations. The League of Nations Union was ultimately under the leadership of the Rhodes Round Table movement as its president was Round Table member Sir Edward Grey. Grey working with Lord Milner, Lionel Curtis, and Philip Kerr. All these men present in Paris 1919 and were prominent in the League’s creation.

 

4. 1917 Club founded in 1917 among the political salons of Soho London. Founded by Leonard Woolf and the British intelligence cryptographer, Oliver Strachey. Named after the February 1917 Bolshevik revolution. Membership was largely made up of Labour Party members, Liberal Party members of the Union of Democratic Control, and the Bloomsbury Set. And within the Bloomsbury Set we find the Cambridge Apostles. Making for an interesting collection of artists, authors, painters, and intellectuals indeed. Beginning with Leonard’s famous wife, one of the most influential modernist writers of the 20th century, Adeline Virginia Woolf.

Other notables include: Aldous Huxley, H.G. Wells, Ramsay MacDonald and Lord Walter Rothschild. The British economist John Maynard Keynes, Bertrand Russell, G. E. Moore, and Ludwig Wittgenstein all members as Cambridge Apostles. Russell and Wittgenstein considered two of the most influential of 20th century philosophers.

 

To find those most responsible for this international scheme we are forced to peel back several layers of the established historical narrative. There is no denying the complicit involvement in the creation of the League of Nations by the Taft, Grey, Woolf, and Bryce groups, but publicly it was Woodrow Wilson’s innermost circle of advisors that led the charge. Wilson’s advisory group of specially appointed political and social scientists, private professors, international lawyers and economists, while usurping in importance the president’s own administration, were intermingling with and serving the interests of the House of Morgan, Wall Street financers, American aristocrats, US Court Justices, Zionist world leaders, and members of the burgeoning US military intelligence community. And it is from this ominous circle of friends we find those most responsible for the writing of the Fourteen Points published on January 8, 1918, and its final draft, the Covenant of the League of Nations, signed on January 10, 1920.

Note the Inter-Allied Conferences were chaired by Sidney Webb and George Bernard Shaw an executive member. Also note on the same document how several delegates were confused as to why the word ‘socialist’ was included on their credentials. This is why we refer to these meetings as the Inter-Allied Socialist and Labor Conferences. These documents can be found in their entirety in our House of Applied Knowledge above.

 

A closer look revealing that it is here, within these obscure groups, and not in Paris, that we find the actual launch of the League. We see uncovered fraternal affiliations that transcend party affiliation, woven together through years of friendship into an incredibly eclectic mosaic.  All these groups openly pacifist, but to varying degrees. All were considered progressives united in their search for a collective security. A quick look through the memberships list of these various groups reveals distinct cross over as not only the most influential politicians, statesmen, diplomats, and scholars of our modern history are explicit in their involvement, so too their necessary compliment of popular Western authors, writers, poets, and painters. Here we see how societal control and the manipulation of the masses really works. All these well-known social reformers working in parallel and employing all forms of propaganda in the manufacturing of the public’s consent as America transitioned from the last days of the Gilded Age to the bright promise of modernity and the establishment of a new world order.

There is no denying the complicit involvement in the creation of the League of Nations by the Taft, Grey, Woolf, and Bryce groups, but publicly it was Woodrow Wilson’s innermost circle of advisors that led the charge. Wilson’s advisory group of specially appointed political and social scientists, private professors, international lawyers and economists, while usurping in importance the president’s own administration, were intermingling with and serving the interests of, not our lady liberty or the Constitution of the United States, but the financial interests of the House of Morgan, Wall Street financers, American aristocrats, US Court Justices, Zionist world leaders, and members of the burgeoning US military intelligence community. The very first experts. And it is from this ominous circle of friends we find those most responsible for the writing of the Fourteen Points published on January 8, 1918, and its final draft titled the Covenant of the League of Nations, signed on January 10, 1920.

Louis Dembitz Brandeis

Felix Frankfurter

Wilson’s Inquiry, like Taft’s League to Enforce Peace, was predominantly made up of men of honours tapped phi beta kappa. Woodrow Wilson, Louis Brandeis, Walter Lippmann, Felix Frankfurter all primary authors of Wilson’s Fourteen Points, all secretly PBK. As were Taft, Stimson, and Root. Even Wilson’s personal physician, Cary Grayson had to be phi beta kappa. Also prominent in the writing of the League was Inquiry members Isaiah Bowman, and David Hunter Miller, Secretary of War Newton D. Baker, and (according to Bateson, but not yet substantiated), chairman of the Committee on Public Information, George Creel.  So while, in the one hundred years following the events of Paris, the legacy of the Fourteen Points remains largely attached to Wilson, research herein shows that much credit must go to those surrounding him – especially those leading fatherly voices, those founders and advocates of the Efficiency and Preparedness movements, both subsets of Progressivism: Taft, Root, Stimson, and Lippmann, Frankfurter, Roosevelt.  Frankfurter living up to his moniker here as the ‘kochleffel’ or ‘the stirring spoon’, by being the link connecting the New Republic/House of Truth Set with the Taft Trifecta.

And perhaps there was no more influential voice in the Progressive movement than that of the ‘sage advisor to all’, Frankfurter’s half brother half father, mentor, and Supreme Court Associate Justice Louis Brandeis. Brandeis very influential in persuading Wilson to create from out of executive order the Federal Reserve and the Federal Trade Commission. Brandeis was the soft touch, guiding hand while his protégé, the Judge Advocate General Felix Frankfurter, the heavy-handed iron fist representative of State justice. Frankfurter supervising courts-martial cases for the War Department during the Great War on behalf of the government.  Both Brandeis and Frankfurter massive in the implementation of the first international world order and both central in the creation of the nation of Israel. In fact, Frankfurter, according to eyewitnesses had his foot in every delegation in Paris and, acting as a Brandeis conduit, was one of the conferences most influential figures. Frankfurter parlaying the key personal relationships made earlier at the House of Truth into world changing international policy in Paris.

The relationships forged at the House of Truth a decade prior proving priceless in Paris as Eustace Percy and Loring C. Christie, former flat mates of Frankfurter and Lippmann, held key positions within the British and Canadian Delegations. Percy, a diplomat and close advisor to, not only British Prime Minister David Lloyd George in Paris, but former chief assistant to the British Ambassador, 1st Viscount Bryce and British Foreign Minister and Round Table member Sir Edward Grey in the British Foreign Office. Percy also staying at the House while accompanying Lord Balfour’s foreign mission to Washington in 1917 to discuss past secret imperial treaties mere days after America announced their inclusion in the war. The Balfour Mission while in Washington stayed at Breckinridge Long’s mansion at 2829 16th St NW Washington, not only near the House of Truth but directly across the street from the newly minted Scottish Rite Freemason Lodge. Loring C. Christie, another roommate at the House was another Harvard Law alum, editor-in-chief of the Harvard Law Review and graduated alongside Frankfurter. Christie, despite being a Canadian, worked as an assistant to another House of Truth resident, Winfred Denison in the Department of Justice under Stimson. In fact Frankfurter, Denison and Christie all employed by the Taft government under Stimson years before Paris. Loring C. Christie was, during the peace talks, the personal legal advisor to Canadian Prime Minister, Robert Borden. The entire House of Truth fraternity massive in Paris.

Teddy Roosevelt helping to close this Progressive circle in that, besides being the reason for the creation of the House of Truth, Roosevelt an essential figure in the growth of internationalism. Roosevelt himself recommending the 1907 meetings in the Hague and speaking of the idea of an international League of Peace as early as the Spanish American War before the turn of the century. Roosevelt also phi beta kappa, also a freemason and perhaps the founding father of Progressivism, running the very first progressive platform in 1912 called the Bull Moose Party.

The Century Club

So, when one interested in such things looks past the surface reasoning we witness an undeniable deep secret society association between all of these shapers of the League that transcends party affiliation but not social status.  An additional, but no less important layer of secrecy is revealed when we see that all three members of the 1912 presidential election: Wilson, Taft, and Roosevelt, were all members of New York Gentlemen’s club The Century Association. Other notable Century Club members include: Walter Lippmann, Henry Stimson, Elihu Root, Colonel Edward Mandel House, Thomas W. Lamont, Newton D. Baker, Billings Learned Hand, and Inquiry members Sidney Mezes, Charles Seymour, and James T. Shotwell. Just to name a few.  This list, while not even fully unpacked goes a long way to making sense of our society today. The three successive presidencies of Roosevelt, Taft, and Wilson representing a twenty-year period to begin the 20st century in which presidents and parties would change but not their progressive mission. While the helmsman may have changed, the general direction and destination of the ship remained the same. The Great Society.

The Pilgrims Society

Incredibly, an even more amazing third level of secrecy is uncovered that proves without a doubt a shared interest within these groups for an international order. When one peruses the members list of the Pilgrims Society, the international conspiracy becomes obvious: James Bryce, Elihu Root, Henry Stimson, Robert Cecil, Arthur Balfour, Lord Rothschild, J.P. Morgan, John D. Rockefeller Sr., John D. Rockefeller Jr., Andrew Carnegie, John W. Davis, Charles Dawes, Chauncey Depew, John Foster Dulles, Allen Dulles, Jacob H. Schiff, Richard T. Ely, Nicholas Murray Butler, Andrew Mellon, King Charles III and his wife, the recently diseased, Queen Elizabeth II.

The Fabians Society

All the planning may have officially culminated in Paris, but the work was done in London at meetings held during the war at the Inter-Allied Socialist Labor Conferences held in London from 1915 to September of 1918. The British Labor Party and the Fabians heavily represented at the London based Inter-Allied meetings most notably by two very founders of the Fabian movement, George Bernard Shaw and Sidney Webb. Webb head of the Procedure Committee, a member of the Permanent Inter-Allied Executive Committee, and a chairman of the final meetings in September of 1918. When tracing the creation of the League back to source, it is in these London labor and socialist meetings and not the gilded golden hall of mirrors at the Palace of Versailles that the League was first formalized.  And it is here, during these far more obscure meetings, that we see an amazing confluence of interests. These socialist meetings, clearly dominated by a syndicate of internationally minded men brought together the Fabians, the British Labor Party, the American Progressive movement, with the leaders of international labor. It amazes this historian to know that it was this handful of liberally progressive men and woman who were chosen to shape the League. A far cry from what we are told in school. If we are told of this incredibly important epoch at all. Intellectuals, popular authors, famous poets and painters joined with Wall Street financiers, Supreme Court judges, tax-free foundations, Ivy League scholars, the modern US intelligence community, international Zionism, through secret society memberships in clubs like the Cambridge Apostles, Phi Beta Kappa, Skull and Bones fraternity, the Gentlemen’s Clubs of New York and Washington, Freemasonry, and the Pilgrims Society and more.

Many of these people are the biggest names in their field of work. Many of them pioneers and founders of the professions that most and a vast majority bonded by common fraternal brotherhoods.

Conclusion

What happened at the Treaty of Versailles in 1919 – to answer Gregory Bateson’s question – is more than just the signing of a treaty.  The meetings in Paris profoundly shifted world hegemony westward. And when the Paris peace conference of 1919 is taken in its broadest sense, we can clearly see, without a doubt, that this is where nearly everything we struggle to navigate today found its modern origins. Its where the US formally becomes the new world post graduate understudy to the old-world British imperial emeritus.  Its where America makes its grand debut on the world stage as the preeminent international power. Its where, in less than a year, the American president went from pacifist to interventionalist to internationalist.  And in less than six months, Wilson went from declaring war on Germany to secretly planning a coordinated exit strategy. Almost as if the war itself was a cog of something bigger turning.

When looking at the promise of Paris through the established mainstream narrative nothing about it seems to make sense. Despite claiming Paris was the end to war, war is now perpetual and world peace remains, as it always has, an unattainable ideal.  But, when overlapping the circles of these secret organizations we all of a sudden find commonality. This the modern beginnings to the networking of power that dominates our society today.  As we overlap those shared membership circles we find within the vesica pisces, an exclusive group of men, almost as if the new world order can be distilled down to its purity. Found within the vesica pisces those common to all circles and at the center of these clubs we find the men most influential and responsible for our present-day conundrum. Those engineers of the League of Nations and the Treaty of Versailles named above are now preserved for future historians and the general public to consider.

We look forward to publishing the follow up article, The Future Perfect Part 2 the Cybernetics Revolution soon. In it we make amazing historical connections between the founders of the Inquiry and the cyberneticians of the 1940’s.  A definite trail of evidence connecting the “two most historic events of the 20th century” almost as if one was the natural transgression of the other.

Please follow the author at The History of Propaganda on youtube. Follow on twitter @TriviumMethod or sign up at our very own website at bulletproofpub.com and become a member of a growing concerted effort towards the truth. Footnotes, citations, if not provided in the body of the work can be found at our archives, The House of Applied Knowledge, here at bulletproof.

Fabianism

Socialism (Modern) is the same as, communism (post WWII), is the same as zionism (zevi 1666?), is the same as Nimrodism (Pre Christian)

If your not having hardy laughs at how obvious these facts are, you should be. It’s a comedy routine that has been going on in plain sight far too long to be disputed. The evidence in terms of the literature pre “Progressivism”, is conclusive. The trail does not require a hound, nor a Sherlock for it is entirely self evident and available to any party that ganders upon it.

It’s the same theme over and over. The saga continues now introducing the “semitic hordes” of “Carthaginians”, from Carthage, the Phoenician city that was the most powerful political entity in the Mediterranean. And who were the “Phoenicians”? I sure do love these bits of knowledge.

Master Key Please

Phoenicians were the Canaanites; Who are the Canaanites? Now, this is where it gets real good. When you get this one, its the like the one ring that connects them all.

“You are the KEYMASTER”

1. Hyksos “Exodus from Egypt”

This is what we need to get into. This is the saga I want to dig into next.

2. Hasmonean High Priesthood – Macabees

Cults cults and more cults. Cults anyone?

3. Noahide Laws – Anti Christ – And the age of deception.

It’s all kicks n’ giggles, until its not. Some speak of Age of Aquarius, the golden age of man our current epoch. But is it really? 

1

All lies come with misinformation to give man hope in a hopeless world. I have bad news, and I have very bad news. Which do you want first?

2

After the scattering of tongues the Dark Titan known as “Nimrod”, son of Cush, Son of Ham, Son of Noah became a man of many names and tales. With the help of his mother and wife Semiramis, he became legend even after death. Gilgames IS Nimrod, and the anti-christ has already risen to once again defy god in a unholy alliance.

3

We have been warned clearly in the Jesuit guidebook created to help guide us through to their goals. It’s called the Holy Bible. I highly recommend everyone reads it, as it is the key to understanding everything. Note me not saying what should be said, but its on you to make your own thesises.

How Many Times

Do you have to hear a lie
Before it's true??

Out of Fabianism comes the British Labor Party. This is how they transferred their humanist, progressive, technocratic move into society. Wolf in sheeps clothing is the Coat of Arms of the Fabian Society. 

Recent Blogs

With sincere dicernment for truth, we present history UN occulted:

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...

Join Our Mailing List

How Secret Societies Rule The World

It often strikes a man to inquire what is the chief good in life; to one the thought comes that it is a happy marriage, to another great wealth, and as each seizes on the idea, for that he more or less works for the rest of his existence. To myself, thinking over the same question, the wish came to me to render myself useful to my country. I then asked the question. How could I?” The Last Will and Testament Of Cecil Rhodes. Edited by William T. Stead. (1)

 

Front row, left to right: Andrew Carnegie, J.P. Morgan, Alfred Beit, Lord Alfred Milner. Middle row (left to right): Henry Ford, Cecil Rhodes, Lionel Curtis. Back Row: Colonel Edward House, John D. Rockefeller, Sir Abe Bailey, and Nathan Rothschild.

 

In the year 1871, fueled by the poetic words of famous British poet John Ruskin, and backed by the bottomless fortune of the Rothschild family, British Imperialist Cecil John Rhodes – at the age of eighteen – entered the burgeoning South African diamond fields. By 1888, Rhodes had nearly monopolized the entire market and together with business partner and wealthy Jewish emigre, Alfred Beit, would build DeBeers Consolidated Mines Ltd into the most well known diamond company in the world. Rhodes would then spend the remainder of his life ‘rendering himself useful to his country’ by parlaying his immense wealth and influence into becoming Britain’s preeminent figure in the ‘Scramble for Africa’. He would be the main instigator of the second Anglo-Boar War – a brutal battle in which the British would put many of their Dutch enemies into concentration camps similar to what we would see some three decades later in eastern Europe. The imperialist Rhodes even served as Prime Minister of the Cape Colony and through a series of legislation inspired by his belief that the native Africans were a backwards race subjugated hundreds of thousands of men, woman and children into an everlasting life of poverty and slavery.

 

Throughout his entire life, Rhodes had kept a hand written copy of John Ruskin’s Oxford inaugural lecture – one in which Ruskin spoke poetically to the moral responsibility every Englishman had in spreading the civilized ideals of British culture throughout the world – for the betterment of all humankind. It was during these early formative years that Rhodes stated to a friend, “have you ever thought how it is that Oxford men figure so largely in most departments of public life? Where ever you turn your eye…an Oxford man is at the top of the tree.”(2) It was also during these early years that Rhodes was quietly developing the idea of a secret society in which he could enact these British imperialist principles through a discrete alignment with America – as evidenced by his personal letters to well known journalist and personal confidante, William T. Stead in 1877:

 

Cecil John Rhodes, DeBeers Diamonds

 

“I contend that we are the first race in the world, and that the more of the world we inhabit the better it is for the human race. I contend that every acre added to our territory means the birth of more of the English race who otherwise would not be brought into existence. Added to this, the absorption of the greater portion of the world under our rule simply means the end of all wars…What an awful thought it is that if we had not lost America, or if even now we could arrange with the present members of the United States Assembly and our House of Commons, the peace of the world is secured for all eternity! We could hold your federal parliament five years at Washington and five at London. The only thing feasible to carry this idea out is a secret one (society) …copied from the Jesuits as to organization…gradually absorbing the wealth of the world to be devoted to such an object…to crush all disloyalty and every movement for the severance of our Empire.”(3)

 
 

Only a few short years later, in the winter of 1891, along with William T. Stead and Lord Esher, Rhodes (already a Freemason) forms the secretive Rhodes Round Table Group fashioned after the internal workings of the Jesuits. He envisioned a system of concentric rings within rings where only those at the core would know the society’s true objectives, and all those in the outer rings would form an ‘Association of Helpers’. Rhodes would elect Stead, Esher and influential British statesman Lord Alfred Milner into his inner circle which Rhodes called ‘The Society of the Elect’. This association of helpers would include names from the highest levels of British aristocracy and cover all aspects of social, political, economic, military, and intellectual life. (4) Together, this small but powerful group of men of wealth and influence would go on to shape the world in their image with the explicit intent of combining American and British interests with the object of, bringing the whole uncivilized world under British rule, for the recovery of the United States for the making the Anglo-Saxon race but one empire. What a dream!”(5). And if all of Rhodes’ hundred year old anglophile rhetoric somehow echoes familiar, you are paying attention dear reader – this same imperial exceptionalist banter has been the driving force behind every war in contemporary Western history including the most recent Iraq War at the beginning of this century. But more on that in a moment, allow me to continue connecting the dots.

 

Following Rhodes’ death in 1902, Lord Alfred Milner – a man who despised the party system – set the itinerary and directives for the Round Table Group. Milner served as the perfect successor as he was the one man with whom Rhodes trusted with the responsibility of continuing the secret goals set out in his Last Will and Testament, stating, “I support Milner absolutely without reserve. If he says peace, I say peace; if he says war, I say war. Whatever happens, I say ditto to Milner.”(7) In fact, so influential after Rhodes’ death was Milner that this secret society became known as The Milner Round Table Group, and it is important to note that, despite losing it’s founder in Rhodes, the pursuit of their goals and the spirit with which they chased them remained the same. Largely unknown to the general public, this group was highly influential. Key members of The Milner Group were the primary instigators in changing the name of the British Empire to the British Commonwealth of Nations, they were even the chief influence in British Prime Minister Lloyd George’s War Administration of 1917. Members of The Milner Group even dominated the British delegation at the 1919 Paris Peace Conference and were key participants in the formation of the League of Nations.

Rhodes and Milner both number themselves of that great unformed party which is neither the ins nor the outs, which touches here the foreign politics of the one, here the home politics of the other…a party which seems to have no name, no official leader, no paper even, but which I believe, when it comes by a soul and a voice, will prove to include a majority of the British in Britain and a still greater majority of the British overseas. (6)

 

And it is the less publicized events of the 1919 Paris Peace Conference that are of the utmost importance for this article as it was during this conference that Lionel Curtis, an inductee into The Milner Group’s inner society of the elect, and Colonel Edward M. House, chief adviser to Woodrow Wilson, who would quietly bring together British and American delegates to form the Royal Institute of International Affairs (Chatham House) and eventually it’s American counterpart, the Council on Foreign Relations in 1921.(8)(9) These organizations remain today as two of the most influential think tanks in the world and their creation was seen by those gathered in Paris as an integral convergence of Western ideals and a huge step towards accomplishing Rhodes’ Anglo-American ‘dream’.(10) This point further underlined in the following quote from Carroll Quigley below. It is also worthy of note that Colonel Edward House did much of the preliminary work, along with British Foreign Secretary Edward Grey(also a Milner Group associate) in formulating the main components of the peace treaty of 1919 and would be hugely influential in assisting Wilson in writing his famous Fourteen Points Speech. House was in fact such an influence on Wilson both personally and professionally that further discussion on this man is needed; however, for purposes of time and space, and for fear of digression, the subject will be left for my follow up article entitled, From Hidden Hand to Iron Fist.

 

The Royal Institute of International Affairs is nothing but the Milner Group ‘writ large.’ It was founded by the Group, has been consistently controlled by the Group, and to this day is the Milner Group in its widest aspect. It is the legitimate child of the Round Table organization, just as the latter was the legitimate child of the ‘Closer Union’ movement organized in South Africa in 1907. All three of these three received their initial financial backing from Sir Abe Bailey, and all three used the same methods of working out and propagating their ideas (the so-called Round Table method of discussion groups plus a journal). This similarity is not an accident. The new organization was intended to be a wider aspect of the Milner Group, the plan being to influence the leaders of thought through The Round Table [journal] and to influence a wider group through the RIIF. – Anglo American Establishment, Carroll Quigley, page 182.

 
 

Colonel Edward House is seated three seats to Woodrow Wilson’s right while Lord Alfred Milner sits five places to the presidents left.

 

On May 30, 1919, a little group of diplomats and scholars from Britain and the United States convened at the Hotel Majestic, billet of the British delegation, to discuss how their fellowship could be sustained after the peace. They proposed a permanent Anglo-American Institute of International Affairs, with one branch in London, the other in New York. (11)

 

Over one hundred years later, Rhodes’ colossal influence can still be felt as you walk the grounds of prestigious All Souls College and Balliol College, or as you walk through The Great Milner Hall inside Rhodes House at Oxford University. The original Rhodes vision, laid out in his sixth and final Last Will and Testament, lives on today through the Rhodes Trust and the Rhodes Scholarship program and it is Rhodes’ original idea of an Anglo-American union that wealthy American industrialists like J.P. Morgan, John D. Rockefeller, Andrew Carnegie and Henry Ford would directly align themselves with by funding many projects undertaken by the Council on Foreign Relations. And this same undercurrent of British/American exceptionalism continues to be the primary object of the Council as evidenced by the comments of it’s President Emeritas, Leslie H. Gelb when he stated, “If the Council as a body has stood for anything these 75 years, it has been for American Internationalism based on American interests.”(12)

 

“Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure – One World, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.” David Rockefeller, Memoirs, pg 404,405

 

And, when Gelb’s comment is put together with the preceding comments made by the Council’s Honorary Chairman David Rockefeller we see an admitted, unquenchable thirst for global domination. And, in turn, when these comments are understood within their full historical context, using the true origins of the Royal Institute of International Affairs and the Council on Foreign Relations as a backdrop, we see both motive and method of operation fully exposed under the light of the truth, we see an internationally coordinated push to subjugate all other races that is anything but conspiracy ‘theory’. We see Rhodes acting as a millionaire monarch of the modern world, blanketing all backward, uncivilized races underneath the authority of one race – what he called the ‘first race’ – and the origins of a slow march towards what we know today as a One World Government, or a New World Order(13)

 
 

Over the course of the 1950’s large foundations stepped in to support and enlarge the Council as a leading force in America’s international awareness; from the Rockefeller Foundation and Carnegie Corporation came $500,000 each, topped by $1.5 million from the new Ford Foundation in 1954. (14)

 

The Administration of William Jefferson Blythe III, the Rhodes Scholar

After receiving a Bachelor of Science in Foreign Service degree while studying under the tutelage of history professor Carroll Quigley at Georgetown’s School of Foreign Service in 1968, a young William Jefferson Blythe III crossed the Atlantic to take up residence at Oxford University. And, although he departed prior to receiving a degree (some contend his departure was rather acrimonious), he was still heavily influenced by his time there, he had met a great deal of influential people, a few of whom would end up in his White House cabinet two decades later. Blythe III would rise to world prominence as the president of the United States and a key historical figure in the furtherance of Cecil Rhodes’ Anglo-Saxon dream. In fact, Blythe III’s cabinet was littered with fellow Rhodes Scholars as well as the aforementioned Lionel Curtis inspired, Council on Foreign Relations – and each and every one of them not elected by the people, but appointed to their positions by Blythe III.

Blythe’s communications director, George Stephanoupoulos is a Rhodes scholar and a CFR member while Blythe’s Secretary of State Madelaine Albright is a longtime member of the Council on Foreign Relations. Blythe’s Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, Walter B. Slocombe was Under Secretary of Defense for Policy over the entirety of Blythe’s tenure as president but also served under Carter and Reagan and was on the Committee on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction under George W. Bush – he is both a Rhodes Scholar and a member of the CFR. R. James Woolsey was appointed to Blythe’s staff as the Director of the CIA from 1993 to 1995; is a core member of a Project for a New American Century; a senior adviser to what Bloomberg named “the world’s most profitable spy organization” Booz Allen Hamilton from 2002 to present day and has heavily influenced the Carter, Reagan, and George H.W. Bush administrations as well as being a Rhodes Scholar. Richard Danzig served as Blythe’s Under Secretary of the Navy (1993-1997) and was promoted to US Secretary of Navy from 1998-2001 and is a Rhodes Scholar. David E. Kendall met Blythe while both were attending Oxford, and is legal counsel for both him and his wife Hillary Clinton – advising William during his impeachment trials and Hillary during the more recent private email scandal while she was U.S. Secretary of State – Kendall is a Rhodes Scholar.

 

 

William Jefferson Blythe III

George Stephanopoulos

Madeleine Albright

Walter B. Slocombe

James Woolsey

Stephen A. Oxman, was a liaison at the very heart of the Anglo American Establishment, serving under Blythe III as Assistant Secretary of State for European and Canadian Studies, he is both a Rhodes Scholar and a CFR member. Robert Reich is also a Rhodes Scholar, served under both Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter and was Secretary of Labor under Blythe. Blythe’s Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott is a Rhodes Scholar and a CFR member. Ashton Carter served as Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Policy under Blythe III and, following 9/11, was responsible for strategic affairs including the treatment of weapons of mass destruction and adviser on the creation of the Department of Homeland Security under George W. Bush. He was also the Deputy Secretary of Defense under Obama, overseeing the DOD’s budget – Carter is both a member of the CFR and a Rhodes Scholar.

Nancy-Ann DeParle is a Rhodes Scholar and served under Blythe as the director of the Health Care Financing Administration from 1997 to 2000. Robert Malley was Assistant National Security Adviser and Director for Democracy, Human Rights and Humanitarian Affairs at the National Security Council under Blythe, a fellow at the CFR and a Rhodes Scholar. Daniel R. Porterfield was chief speechwriter and Deputy Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs(Policy & Strategy) for US Health and Human Services Secretary under Blythe and a Rhodes Scholar. Susan Rice was on the National Security Council under both Blythe and Obama, the US Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs during Blythe’s second term, and was even honored by the Royal Institute of International Affairs for – of all things – her dissertation entitled Commonwealth Initiative in Zimbabwe (formerly named Rhodesia after Cecil Rhodes). Rice is both a member of the CFR and a Rhodes Scholar.

Because Blythe’s presidency was book-ended by the Bush war regimes, many simply dismiss out-of-hand any claim of Blythe as a warmonger, but the aggressive foreign policy he initiated is prolific and displayed for all to see in the annals of documented history. Blythe’s reign is consistently cited as the longest period of peacetime economic expansion in American history(15)(16)(17) and while this author may not disagree with the expansionist part, the inclusion of the words ‘peace time’ pushes the definition well beyond even it’s most widest interpretation and into the realm of blatant lies.

By whitewashing a truly repulsive eight-year term into something resembling the altruistic acts of a saint, these journalists and political pundits participate in logical fallacy and do a great disservice to the American people. And it is because of this general misunderstanding of the Blythe regime that it becomes imperative to understand the most infamous event of his tenure under the proper light. The Monica Lewinsky affair and the subsequent Kenneth Starr trial was a mere smokescreen for the continuance of a global takeover objective initiated by an unchecked global superpower.

During Blythe’s eight years in office, the U.S. military bombed Afghanistan, Bosnia, Serbia, Sudan, Somalia and Iran. Interestingly, Blythe also ordered the bombing of the Iraqi intelligence headquarters of Saddam Hussein with cruise missiles on reports Hussein was building WMD’s. A man simply before his time, Blythe imposed a no-fly zone over Iraq that lasted his entire term and the bombing campaign persisted right up to the 2003 Bush led Iraq invasion. He deployed troops in Albania, Central African Republic, East Timor, Kuwait, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Liberia, and, in Iran we see, for the first time, a president use the term ‘state sponsored terrorism’ – yet all we remember from his presidency is an Oval Office tryst and him as a ‘peace time’ president. All of these aforementioned countries opposed to the rule of an overzealous Western ideology and all of it done under the guise of ‘spreading democracy’ or, for the ‘liberation of an oppressed people’. In truth, when all things are considered, the Blythe administration was simply maintaining the initiative that Rhodes had set out as early as 1891, “to crush all disloyalty and every movement for the severance of our Empire.” Under Blythe, the expansionist war drum never missed a beat.

I did not have sexual relations with that woman.” William Jefferson Blythe III, January 26, 1998

 

 

The Project for A New American Century

Chances are, nearly everyone above the age of consent in 1998, will remember where they were when William Jefferson Blythe III called an impromptu news conference to address allegations of his sexual transgressions within the Oval Office; but I’m sure an even greater number of people would be completely unaware that on that same infamous day in history a memorandum from a small group of upstart neoconservatives landed on the president’s desk that would have far more serious global implications that are still being felt today. These men, unknown to anyone outside of Washington at the time, would rise to world prominence less than a year after the conclusion of Blythe’s presidency when on September 11, 2001 – another infamous day in history – the world changed forever, ‘dividing our past and future into a before and after’.

In this fateful letter, signed by eighteen members and outside supporters of a newly formed neocon think tank called The Project for a New American Century were calling for a much needed “diplomatic, political and military effort” for “the removal of Saddam Hussein’s regime from power”. They pointed to an eroding policy of containment from partners in the Gulf War coalition and a “misguided insistence on unanimity in the UN Security Council” as the leading causes and were urging Blythe in the upcoming presidential address to “chart a clear and determined course” to combat this threat.(18) More on this in a moment.

Further research shows Rhodes Scholars and CFR members are well represented within the ranks of every administration for the past five decades and this obvious Rhodes influence shows an undeniable ominous continuity of pro Anglo-Saxon ideology that transcends the authority of government, overlapping from one administration to the next, seriously calling into question, if not entirely obliterating – the validity of the two party system. When those with whom the people elect to the highest offices of government are deeply influenced by special unelected advisers and strategists who all come from the same ‘school of thought’ and who all adhere to the same imperialist principles of global domination set out in Cecil Rhodes’ Last Will and Testament we begin to see cogent evidence as to why the West – no matter what party holds power – is in a state of constant conflict with the areas of the world that resist the culture of a foreign entity hellbent on imposing it upon them and why we see a toxic axiom of doublespeak constantly emanating from Washington that is straight out of Orwell’s 1984 – War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength.

 

“Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor. ”

 

– The Project for a New American Century, Rebuilding America’s Defenses, September 2000, pg. 51.

Of the eighteen signatories of the letter, thirteen would go on to fill important cabinet positions within the Bush administration; at least eleven were members of, or worked directly within the Council on Foreign Relations; and every last one of the eighteen were well known neocons:

Elliott Abrams (CFR, neocon, Spec. Assistant to President, NSC), Richard L. Armitage (neocon, U.S. Deputy Secretary of State), William J. Bennett (neocon, Dir. of Office of Nat. Drug Control Policy), Jeffrey Bergner (neocon, Assistant to Secretary of State for Legislative Affairs), John Bolton (neocon, U.S. Ambassador to the UN), Paula Dobriansky (Senior Vice President CFR, neocon, Under Secretary of State for Democracy and Global Affairs), Francis Fukuyama (CFR, neocon), Robert Kagan (CFR, neocon), Zalmay Khalilzad (CFR, neocon, U.S. Ambassador to the UN), William Kristol (CFR, neocon), Richard Perle (neocon), Peter W. Rodman (neocon, U.S. Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs), Donald Rumsfeld (neocon, U.S. Secretary of Defense), William Schneider, Jr. (CFR, neocon, U.S. Department of Defense), Vin Weber (CFR, neocon), Paul Wolfowitz (CFR, neocon) Deputy Secretary of State), R. James Woolsey (CFR, neocon, Dir. of CIA), Robert B. Zoellick (CFR, neocon, Deputy Secretary of State, U.S. Trade Representative).

 

Members of the Bush administration who were not signatories but were either Council on Foreign Relations members, neoconservatives, or both, include:

 

Paul Bremer(CFR, neocon, Coalition Provisional Authority), Dick Cheney (Director of CFR, neocon, Vice President of United States, ). Condoleezza Rice (CFR, 66th Secretary of State), Colin Powell (CFR, 65th Secretary of State), Henry Paulson (CFR, 74th Secretary of the Treasury), John W. Snow (neocon, 73rd Secretary of the Treasury, American Enterprise Institute). Robert Gates (CFR, neocon, Secretary of Defense, CIA, NSC), John Ashcroft (neocon, U.S. Attorney General), Anne Veneman (CFR, U.S. Secretary of Agriculture), Elaine Chao (CFR, Secretary of Labor), Tommy G. Thompson (CFR, U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services), Christine Todd Whitman (CFR, Administrator of EPA).

 

Note: Several of Blythe’s administration were known as the Vulcans and had previously held important cabinet positions under the previous president, George H. W. Bush and then later, under George W. Bush.

 
 

The Project for a New American Century (PNAC) was a neoconservative not-for-profit think tank established in 1997 – “to promote American global leadership”. It was established by neocons, William Kristol and Robert Kagan and represents – to many of today’s political pundits and historians – as the very peak of neoconservativism. Kagan, one of its directors is also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and served in the State Department during the troubled second half of Reagan’s presidency as a member of it’s Policy Planning Staff. William Kristol was the acting chairman of PNAC, and while there is no public mention of his membership to the CFR, he certainly has no aversion to rubbing shoulders with those who are – publishing multiple articles within the CFR’s bi-monthly magazine, Foreign Affairs. And when one considers that William Kristol’s father Irving, was himself a member and is credited with being the ‘godfather of neoconservatism’ we see such an obvious alignment of ideologies that William’s absence from the CFR’s membership list becomes merely anecdotal. All other co founders and key contributors to PNAC are officially listed as directors and in the paragraph to follow – for reasons that will become clear later – I include all relevant titles or associations they held prior to, during, or after their involvement with PNAC. They were: Devon Gaffney Cross, Bruce P. Jackson, John R. Bolton, Gary Schmitt and Thomas Donnelly.

Devon Gaffney Cross is also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and worked under famous neocon hardliner Richard Perle at the Defense Policy Board Advisory Committee. Bruce P Jackson makes the neoconservative list and is also a member of the CFR. He was vice president of Strategy and Planning for Lockheed Martin and president of the US Committee on NATO – a non-profit corporation formed to promote the expansion of NATO and the strengthening of ties between the US and Europe. Jackson served in military intelligence and has been the president for the Project on Transitional Democracies from 2002 to the present day. John R. Bolton‘s legendary hawkish reputation on U.S. foreign policy precedes him, he is a senior fellow and former Senior Vice President for public policy research for the American Enterprise Institute – another infamous neocon haunt. He argued against biological weapons inspections of U.S. military sites in 2001 and is a very outspoken proponent for the overthrow of Iraq, Iran and Syria. He is presently the National Security Advisor for the Trump administration. Gary Schmitt is a well known neoconservative but is also listed as the co founder, chairman and executive director of PNAC and was the executive director of the US Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board under Reagan. Thomas Donnelly is another neoconservative who now – after some degree of sexual identity reform – goes by the name of Giselle. She was deputy director of PNAC and has been the project director at the Lockheed Martin Corporation since 2002.

In PNAC’s initial Statements of Principles, published on June 3, 1997 – some three years before the letter sent to Blythe – the coauthors indicate an urgency to reestablish the United States as the preeminent force of global dominance, stating that “American foreign and defense policy is adrift” and that conservatives “had not confidently advanced a strategic vision of America’s role in the world. They have not set forth guiding principles for American foreign policy. They have allowed differences over tactics to obscure potential agreement on strategic objectives. And they have not fought for a defense budget that would maintain American security and advance American interests in the new century.” And through the creation of PNAC, they “aimed to change this”. They aimed to “make the case and rally support for American global leadership”. Within this initial piece of literature, the authors laid out, in bullet form, the four most effective ways to accomplish their goals:

 

  • We need to increase defense spending significantly if we are to carry out our global responsibilities today and modernize our armed forces for the future;
  • We need to strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values;
  • We need to promote the cause of political and economic freedom abroad;
  • We need to accept responsibility for America’s unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles.(19)

 

 

William Kristol

Robert Kagan

 

The increase of defense spending, the challenging of hostile regimes, the promotion of freedom abroad, and the preservation and extension of American principles presented in the four points above is the exact rhetoric the world heard in the lead up to every war since Rhode’s Last Will and Testament, including World War I, World War II, the Vietnam War, Operation Desert Storm and the Iraq War. In fact, the Project for a New American Century is widely understood today as the single greatest influencing factor in the U.S. invasion of Iraq and was what gave the smoldering neocon warmonger mandate its first draft of oxygen just as the flame of the ‘old’ century was dying out and just prior to the start of the one we find ourselves in today – a dominant ‘new American century’ and Brzezinski’s Middle Eastern chessboard fully engulfed in flames.

The 25 signatories of The Statement of Principles that has set the course for American foreign policy since 9/11 also reads reads like a CFR, neocon guest list and can be found below. You will see an overlapping of some names when compared to those who signed off on the letter sent to Blythe, but note the importance of some of the additions:

 

Elliott Abrams (CFR,neocon,spec.assistant to president, NSC), Gary Bauer (neocon), William J. Bennett (neocon, Dir. of Nat. Drug Control Policy), Jeb Bush, Dick Cheney (CFR,neocon,Vice Pres.), Eliot A. Cohen(CFR,neocon, counsellor US State Dept.), Midge Decter (neocon, wife of founder of neoconservativism), Paula Dobriansky (Senior Vice Pres. CFR,neocon), Steve Forbes (Editor-In-Chief of Forbes magazine and grandson of the magazines founder), Aaron Friedberg (CFR,Deputy Ass. for Nat. Sec. Affairs), Francis Fukuyama (CFR,neocon), Frank Gaffney (neocon), Fred Ikle, Donald Kagan, Zalmay Khalilzad (CFR,neocon,US Ambassador to UN), Scooter Libby (CFR,neocon, Ass. to Vice Pres. for Nat. Sec. Affairs, Chief of Staff, Ass. to Pres.), Norman Podhoretz (CFR,neocon, advisor to US Information Agency), James Danforth Quayle, Peter Rodman (neocon,Ass.Sec. of Defense for Int’l Sec. Affairs), Stephen Peter Rosen, Harry Rowen (Sec. of Defense Policy Avisory Board), Donald Rumsfeld (neocon, Sec. of Defense), Vin Weber (CFR,neocon), George Weigel and Paul Wolfowitz (CFR,neocon, Deputy Sec. of Defense).(20)(21)

 

The obvious catalyst for the continued American occupation of the Middle East was the events that transpired on the morning of September 11, 2001, and since then, nothing has made any logical sense. From the immediacy with which the mainstream media had identified the culprit as a mysterious cave dwelling ‘mastermind’ named Usama bin Laden and Hussein’s heretofor to be discovered ‘weapons of mass destruction’ to the circumstances surrounding both of their capture and subsequent deaths; from the 9/11 Commission’s obviously compromised investigation to the resulting war on terror and omnipotent domestic surveillance that only grows in scale, the American public continue to be fed a steady dose of fallacy. The absence of empirical evidence to support the sensational claims made by Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and their ilk in the immediate aftermath were obvious to those who were paying attention at the time and now, years later, that dissenting voice has only been further verified. Many at the time voiced their outrage at how the entire narrative was implanted into the public mind and taken as the gospel truth despite many glaring contradictions. And, conveniently enough, any public blow back from a very vociferous minority regarding the lateral shift from Afghanistan and Usama Bin Laden to Iraq and Saddam Hussein was stifled by a CFR member, neocon and head spokesman in the rebuild of Iraq, Paul Bremer(!) Bremer, put there by Rumsfeld, just as the Bush Administration changed the name of the organization from Office for Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance to the much more inauspicious sounding, Coalition Provisional Authority and just like that, the U.S. military had slyly shifted from liberators to occupiers in less than three months after arrival.

Furthermore to all of this, the 9/11 Commission – the investigation that was supposed to unveil to the world the guilty party behind the attacks – quickly disintegrated into a farce led by executive director and CFR member Philip Zelikow. In the end, the official story was rubber stamped for approval and cleared for public consumption without ever having asked key members of the Bush administration any serious questions. In fact, it is an article co written less than one year prior to the events of 9/11 by Zelikow, and fellow CFR member and Rhodes Scholar, Ashton Carter, along with Director of the CIA, John Deutch that serves as a shining example of Hegelian Dialectic (problem, reaction, solution) and indicates the level upon which these secret societies work.

secretiveweThis information, gathered from primary sources, at the very least destroys the official narrative that was being spewed by the Bush administration and repeated by mainstream outlets immediately following 9/11 – that the Bush administration was caught unaware – and we instantly go from considering the neocons implicit responsibility to them having a complicit and intimate knowledge of the crime.  With all of the institutions and information at their disposal it becomes the argument of a mad man to try and defend their actions. Even the most adept in sophistry could not spin the facts and circumstances to make anyone believe that the most historic attack to happen on American soil since the burning of the White House was carried out by a handful of men with box cutters – yet much of America, still do wholeheartedly accept this phantasm as fact. And from this problem came the reaction predicted from the American people and a convenient two pronged solution in the form of The Patriot Act that served to embolden further authoritarian measures of surveillance and control on the citizens of America and a never ending war in the Middle East.

So it is with this knowledge of the Council on Foreign Relations and the Project for A New American Century, its members, and their original mandates, that we begin to see a much clearer and accurate demarcation between allegedly opposing factions; we see a circle of secretive friends that goes much deeper in explaining the real reasons for the overthrow of Hussein than the mainstream narrative had lamely offered. We see organizations that transcend political party. While the ‘reputable’ news organizations all forced the ‘weapons of mass destruction’ fallacy down the throats of an already angry mob of Americans willing to believe anything, and we continue to wait for evidence of this claim some 15+ years after it was first postulated. And, armed with an understanding of the hidden door policies created by PNAC, we can, through forensic historical analysis, create a far better understanding of the events that led up to the invasion of Iraq. We can go from an uninformed citizenry inundated with conflicting, nonsensical conclusions, to a population able to really see, empowered with the knowledge of the truth that transcends the color of Party

As I’m sure is now clear to the reader, we see a commonality in the inner structure of all of these secretive groups of powerful men: the Rhodes Round Table, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Royal Institute of International Affairs and even the more contemporary Project for A New American Century who all operate in a consistent manner of secrecy and – from Rhodes to Rumsfeld – all are driven by a common thread of Anglo American supremacy that can be traced directly back to The Last Will and Testament of one Cecil John Rhodes. An imperial aggression being hidden under words like ‘interventionalism’ and ‘expansionism’.  They all subscribe to the “Round Table method of discussion plus a journal” and their intent is to influence the ‘leaders of thought’ to steer foreign and domestic policy in any way they see fit. In all cases, their goals are largely hidden from the public, yet their buildings are brick and mortar. Their names are scrubbed from the front pages of history, yet they have procured disproportionate power and influence through their unelected advisory roles. both in the public and private sectors, and often times simultaneously it is these secret collectives that direct corporate policy of not only large Defense contractors like Booz Allen, Lockheed Martin and Halliburton, but government policy on a state, federal and international level.

You can follow the author on Bitchute, Gab, Minds, Trooth, and Twitter @TriviumMethod, and on Facebook and YouTube at The History of Propaganda

Citations and Footnotes:

 

1) https://archive.org/details/lastwilltestamen00rhodiala/page/58

2) Wikipedia Cecil Rhodes. See also, Alexander, Eleanor, ed. (1914). “Chapter XIV: «South Africa 1893»”. Primate Alexander, Archbishop of Armagh. A memoir. London: Edward Arnold. p. 259.

3) https://archive.org/details/lastwilltestamen00rhodiala/page/58 pages 58,59,61, 73.

4) http://www.carrollquigley.net/pdf/Tragedy_and_Hope.pdf. See also http://www.carrollquigley.net/pdf/The_Anglo-American_Establishment.pdf7

5) https://archive.org/details/lastwilltestamen00rhodiala/page/58

6) E. Garrett, The Empire of the Century. 1905, 481. See also, The Nation and the Empire, 1913, introduction. https://archive.org/details/nationempirebein00miln

7) https://archive.org/details/lastwilltestamen00rhodiala/page/108

8) https://www.chathamhouse.org/about/history

9) https://cfrd8-files.cfr.org/sites/default/files/book_pdf/Continuing_The_Inquiry.pdf pg 5.

10) https://ceoworld.biz/2017/01/31/100-influential-think-tanks-world-2017/

11) https://cfrd8-files.cfr.org/sites/default/files/book_pdf/Continuing_The_Inquiry.pdf pg 5.

12) https://cfrd8files.cfr.org/sites/default/files/book_pdf/Continuing_The_Inquiry.pdf forward, Continuing the Inquiry, The Council on Foreign Relations From 1921 to 1996.

13) https://cfrd8-files.cfr.org/sites/default/files/book_pdf/Continuing_The_Inquiry.pdf pg 29

14) https://cfrd8files.cfr.org/sites/default/files/book_pdf/Continuing_The_Inquiry.pdf pg 29

15) http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/02/AR2008020202521.html

16) https://www.history.com/topics/us-presidents/bill-clinton

17) https://www.nytimes.com/2000/02/08/business/the-battle-of-the-decades-reaganomics-vs-clintonomics-is-a-central-issue-in-2000.html

18) http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonletter.htm

https://archive.org/stream/primatealexander00alexiala#page/258/mode/2up

19) Statement of Principles https://www.rrojasdatabank.info/pfpc/PNAC—statement%20of%20principles.pdf

20) https://www.cfr.org/membership/membership-roster-a-f

21) https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php

How Foundations Created Modern Academia

“Naturally Leipzig became the Mecca of students who wished to study the “new” psychology – a psychology that was no longer a branch of speculative philosophy, no longer a fragment of the science of physiology, but a novel and daring and exciting attempt to study mental processes by the experimental and quantitative methods common to all science. For the psychology of Leipzig was, in the [eighteen] eighties and nineties, the newest thing under the sun. It was the psychology for bold young radicals who believed that the ways of the mind could be measured and treated experimentally – and who possibly thought of themselves, in their private reflections, as pioneers on the newest frontier of science, pushing its method into reaches of experience that it had never before invaded.” (Heidbreder op. cit., 94,95) And the person that everyone went to Leipzig to study under is still considered to be one of the leading figures in the development of psychology today, even ahead of Sigmund Freud, yet hardly anyone has heard of him. His name was Wilhelm Maximilian Wundt. Wundt graduated from the Heidelberg University as a medical doctor in 1856 and remained there for nearly 20 years – first as a professors assistant and later as a professor himself. After a short stay as professor of philosophy at the University of Zurich, he finally arrived at Leipzig University in 1875; it is during his forty-five year career at Leipzig that Wundt established the worlds first psychological research laboratory and initiated the worlds first Ph.D. system in psychology. Due to Wundt’s pioneering efforts, the University of Leipzig quickly gained world wide notoriety as a school for psychological study. In total, Wundt was responsible for awarding 184 doctorates to students between 1875 and 1919 including 70 foreigners and 18 Americans. He also published the journal, Philosophical Studies later to be named Psychological Studies.(1)

The list of men who studied under, or received their Ph.D under Wundt and then proceeded to establish experimental laboratories of their own at American Universities is a long one and include some of the most recognizable names in, not only psychology, but also education: Granville Stanley Hall 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 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 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.

The experimental psychology laboratories that spread throughout the U.S. universities at the turn of the 20th century were nearly exact replicas of those first created at Leipzig University under Wundt in 1879; and this development is considered to be the single most important contributing factor to psychology being accepted as a legitimate scientific study within western academia. This new laboratory approach to psychology also served as the impetus for later advancements in the experimental study of human conditioning and behavior by Ivan Pavlov, BF Skinner and John B. Watson. The above list of leading Americans who studied under Wundt were seen as pioneers of a burgeoning field of scientific study and they found little difficulty in securing positions of influence at major American universities; each of them contributing substantially to the world of experimental psychology. They would also serve as invaluable proponents or advocates of experimental psychology within the scientific community, pushing its legitimacy and efficacy by becoming editors and publishers of their very own periodicals, journals, newspaper articles, magazines, leaflets and pamphlets.

At any rate they threw themselves into their tasks with industry and zest. They became trained introspec-tionists and, adding introspection to the resources of the physiological laboratories they attempted the minute analysis of sensation and perception. They measured reaction-times, following their problems into numerous and widespread ramifications. They investigated verbal reactions, thus extending their researches into the field of association. They measured the span and the fluctuations of attention and noted some of its more complex features in the “complication experiment”…In their studies of feeling and emotion they recorded pulse-rates, breathing-rates, and fluctuations in muscular strength, and in the same connection they developed methods of recording systematically and treating statistically the impressions observed by introspection. They also developed psychophysical methods and in addition made constant use of resources of the physiological laboratory.

And throughout all their endeavors they were dominated by the conception of a psychology that should be scientific as opposed to speculative; always they attempted to rely on exact observation, experimentation, and measurement. Finally when they left Leipzig and worked in laboratories of their own – chiefly in American and German universities – most of them retained enough of the Leipzig impress to teach a psychology that, whatever the subsequent development of the individual’s thought, bore traces of the system which was recognized at Leipzig as orthodox. (Heidbreder, op. cit., 94-5.)

Granville Stanley Hall was a giant among the early education reformers and the first American to learn under Wilhelm Wundt at Leipzig before returning to heavily influence the American education system.(2) Hall’s main interests and contributions were in childhood development, evolutionary theory, and their various applications to education. He joined the newly established Johns Hopkins University in 1883, working with his former instructor William James and contemporary James McKeen Cattell. He established the first psychology lab at John Hopkins(3), modelling it after the much respected Wundtian laboratory at Leipzig and like Wundt, Hall created an impressive amount of literature to compliment his practical experimentation. Hall established the American Journal of Psychology, editing the Pedagogical Seminary after 1892, the American Journal of Religious Psychology and Education after 1904, and the Journal of Race Development after 1910, while writing books like Aspects of German Culture (1881), and The Contents of Children’s Minds on Entering School (1894). He also originated the Journal of Applied Psychology(4) and wrote Youth: Its Education, Regiment, and Hygiene in 1906, and Educational Problems in 1911.(5) In 1917 he wrote, Jesus, the Christ, in the Light of Psychology in which he made public his reformist beliefs when writing that “Man was the only true divinity”. However, his most well known work is the two volume, Adolescence: Its Psychology and Its Relations to Physiology, Anthropology, Sociology, Sex, Crime, Religion, and Education in 1904 and it is with this book that Hall is credited with coining the term ‘adolescence’. 

Additionally it is important to note that this book on adolescence was published in an era when child labor laws and compulsory education were both being enacted, and the high school was quickly becoming the largest growing educational institution of the early twentieth century. If children were being freed from the constraints of labor, Hall believed there would be need for an alternative institution within which the youth could be controlled.

Hall’s approach to education was to indoctrinate students into having selfless ideals of: service, patriotism, body culture, military discipline, love of authority, and devotion to the state while he consistently argued against intellectual attainment at all levels of public education and did not tolerate open discussion or critical opinions. To Hall, students needed to be indoctrinated in order to save them from the individualism that was so damaging to the progress of American culture. Having no sympathy for the sick, poor or people with disability, Hall was an advocate of forced sterilization and selective breeding; believing any charity given to the weak only disrupted or delayed the evolution of natural selection towards a super-race. He despised the thought of education for girls, stating on page thirty-five of The Ideal School as Based on Child Study that education for girls was “wrong and vicious” and “every girl should be educated primarily to become a wife and mother”, and in his letter to George A. Bullock, he elaborated on the topic,

“I am strongly opposed to giving women the slightest foothold in the college…I feel that they would crowd out the best men…”(6)

Hall’s, Adolescence was written with the intent of it becoming a guide for teachers and social workers within the education system and his most direct influence in shaping our view of education came from his theories regarding adolescence. One of his more telling essays, this one from The Education of the Will, Hall writes that, “The only duty of small children is habitual and prompt obedience”(7)

Hall would eventually leave his work at Johns Hopkins University unfinished due to a conflict in curriculum and would become the first president of Clark University in 1889. While at Clark he was famously influential in the field of psychology, and it is worth noting that Hall was responsible for Sigmund Freud’s one and only visit to the United States in the late summer of 1909. Freud and Carl Jung would deliver multiple lectures at Clark University which was also attended by William James, A. A. Brill, James McKeen Cattel and E.B. Titchener. Thus it is here that we see evidence of the co-mingling of pursuits between that of psycho-analytics and educational psychology. In fact Hall greatly admired Freud and had read all of his work. The latter half of Hall’s life was largely influenced by Freud, as evidenced by one of his many personal letters to the Austrian psychiatrist:

I think I have read about everything you have ever written, although in my limitations, there is much that I did not understand, and a little which, if I did understand it alright I have to question. Nevertheless, I owe to you almost a new birth of intellectual interest in psychology, as is perhaps best shown in my Jesus Book, which, without this, would not have been written.”(8)

Hall, inspired by Darwin’s evolutionary theory and the eugenics movement, was an advocate of social-Darwinism – Hall believing that the “lower races” should be given the chance to adapt and accept the “superior white race”(9). When one looks back at the totality of Granville Stanley Hall’s work, its hard to ignore his racist, eugenicist, male chauvinist traits; and its equally hard not to see, through his massive influence as one of the main figures in education reform, how these personal stereotypes and prejudiced beliefs couldn’t help but be implemented into society. While Hall does receive considerable admiration from the conventional establishment for changing the natural trajectory of education, I believe as Lawrence Cremin does when he wrote regarding Hall, that “he injected into the mainstream of American educational thought some of the most radical – and I happen to think virulent – doctrines of the twentieth century, and there is no understanding the present apart from his contribution.”(10) In total, Hall would award one hundred and forty-nine doctorates under his tutelage at Johns Hopkins and Clark Universities.

James McKeen Cattell was another leading figure in the development of the science of psychology. Cattell was Wundt’s first assistant and in 1886, would be the first American to receive his Ph.D in experimental psychology at Leipzig. In 1887, following his time at Leipzig, Cattell traveled to England and lectured at the prestigious Cambridge University where he met Francis Galton – Charles Darwin’s cousin – who was busily developing anthroprometric tests similar to those being carried out at Leipzig like: the measurement of skull size, visual acuity and reaction time. Cattell was impressed with Galton’s structuralist approach to psychology as well as his perspective on eugenics. Galton believed that “a man’s natural abilities are derived by inheritance, under exactly the same limitations as are the form and physical features of the whole organic world.”(11) Here we see another early attempt by the education reformers to fallaciously impart Darwin’s theory of evolution onto the social structure of humanity by believing that a persons success or failures in life were largely determined by their genetics and inheritance; something we know today to be categorically false.

It is from Cattell’s early studies that we see the development of the first mental tests: color perception, pain sensitivity, visual after images, memory, and mental imagery. It is also during this era that Cattell would travel back to the United States on occasion to lecture at the University of Pennsylvania and Bryn Mawr College late in 1887. While at the University of Cambridge Cattell developed one of the first psychological laboratories in the country(12), designed after Wundts model at Leipzig.

After returning to the States permanently in 1889, James McKeen Cattell filled the position of Professor of Psychology at the University of Pennsylvania and would begin to administer the first psychological testing on large groups of people at Columbia University. The next year he returned to the University of Pennsylvania as chairman of the department of psychology establishing another experimental laboratory(13,) and in 1891 became the director at the department of psychology at Columbia(14). He would co-found the American Psychological Association in 1892, becoming its president in 1895 (15); while also taking responsibility for the department of anthropology from 1896 to 1902 and the department of philosophy from 1902 to 1905.(16)

Like Hall, Cattell was prolific in the promotion of the new science of experimental psychology. He became the first psychologist elected to the National Academy of Sciences. He and James Mark Baldwin founded The Psychological Review,(17) and Cattell was instrumental in creating the journal, Science, which was the official publication of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.(18) Cattell had his very own printing press and at the beginning of the 20th century would put it to good use becoming editor-in-chief and publisher of the Popular Science Monthly,(19) which would eventually become Popular Science while also founding the Archives of Psychology(20). In 1908 he assumed control of the American Naturalist(21) and in 1915 he created a weekly publication called School and Society(22). Cattell also wrote for American Men of Science; Leaders in Education; and The Directory of American Scholars(23). All of these literary efforts working to firmly supplant psychology into the collective minds of American science for good. And by no means is this list exhaustive, Cattell continued to write, publish and edit prolifically throughout his career.

He supervised 344 doctoral candidates during his quarter century at Columbia University and forty-six members of the American Psychological Association received their Ph.D. during his tenure. More students received their doctorate at Columbia under his leadership than at any other time in the school’s history. Cattell left just as much of a lasting impression on his students as he did on the discipline of psychology itself and is one of, if not the leading figure in the continuation of Wundtian experimental psychology in the United States. James McKeen Cattell died on January 20, 1944.

James Mark Baldwin would receive his Ph.D under Wundt at Leipzig in 1885(24), and return to the States to re-open the psychology laboratory at Johns Hopkins after it had closed due to the departure of Hall to Clark University. He is also credited with the development of the first experimental psychology lab at Princeton. Baldwin would become one of the more preeminent psychologists of his day – voted the fifth most influential in 1903 – he literally wrote the book on psychology. Baldwin advanced a curriculum from which future aspiring psychologists would study by producing a two volume textbook entitled the Handbook of Psychology in 1889. In that same year, upon his appointment as the professor of philosophy at the University of Toronto, he faced considerable public backlash from a predominantly nativist sentiment among Canadians who, at the time, did not favor the introduction of a German education system. Despite the public discontent and a fire that would destroy the University College, Baldwin would establish the first psychology research laboratory in Canada(25). In 1892, he was a founding member of the American Psychology Association becoming its sixth president in 1897, and starting in 1893 he began a ten year career at Princeton University becoming professor of the psychology and philosophy departments while also founding Princeton’s original experimental research laboratory.(26)

Baldwin would also be a proponent of social Darwinism co-writing two works with James McKeen Cattell, Mental Development in the Child and Race in 1895 and Social and Ethical Interpretations in Mental Developments in 1897. He would also edit Cattell’s Psychological Review. Baldwin would be one of the first to administer experiments on children applying Darwin’s theory of evolution to child development. Baldwin would join the psychological department at Johns Hopkins in 1903, and edit works from over 60 philosophers and psychologists in his three volume Dictionary of Philosophy and Psychology in association with Johns Hopkins University; while also advising the National University of Mexico between 1906 and 1911.

By the beginning of World War I, Wundtian psychology was on the decline, having largely been buried both by Gestaltism, which was emanating from out of the Berlin School of Experimental Psychology, and Freudian psychoanalytics from Austria. The appearance of functionalism and behaviorism popularized by B.F. Skinner and Pavlov were proving far more popular than anything coming out of Germany; the American psychological community had now grown to dwarf that of Germany and global prestige and notoriety had shifted to the shores of the United States. American psychologists began using techniques and methods further advanced from those that had been previously taught at Leipzig.

Upon reflection we clearly see a pattern of eugenics-based, anti-American, racist beliefs permeating the minds of the early education reformers. These men who, upon receiving their Ph.D’s from a Prussian University, would come back to North America to create a web of experimental psychology laboratories throughout western academia with the unconstitutional intent of destroying free will and subsuming the individual into society. Every major university would adopt a psychology department in the immediate years following the turn of the century and the centerpiece was the Wundtian experimental laboratory. By 1915, nearly every U.S. university had a psychology department and was led by someone who either trained directly under Wilhelm Wundt or was directly trained by the men who were.

Furthermore, when we employ by way of a historical study of the late 19th century and early 20th, we can prove through primary source material, a distinct, deliberate effort funded by the large Foundations – Rockefeller, Ford, Carnegie and Peabody – to adopt a Prussian universal education system across the United States (see Philanthropic Foundations and Why They Are A Problem). At the same time we now see the development of a burgeoning experimental psychology industry being systematically instituted into every major university in America with funds being primarily focused on understanding the human mind and child psychology. This, as we will see below, was also funded by the large foundations of Rockefeller, Carnegie, and Ford as well as sub groups affiliated to these larger entities namely: The Social Science Research Council, The Institute of Pacific Relations, and The American Council on Education. Evidence of this organizational structure is authored by Rene Wormser, the former council for the Special Committee to Investigate Tax Exempt Foundations, informally referred to as the “The Reece Committee”, in his book Foundations: Their Power and Influence:

There are [grave dangers to our society], these dangers relate chiefly to the use of foundation funds for political ends; they arise out of the accumulation of substantial economic power and of cultural influence in the hands of a class of administrators or tax-exempt funds established in perpetuity. An “elite” has thus emerged, in control of gigantic financial resources operating outside of our democratic processes, which is willing and able to shape the future of this nation and of mankind in the image of its own value concepts. An unparalleled amount of power is concentrated increasingly in the hands of an interlocking and self-perpetuating group. Unlike the power of corporate management, it is unchecked by stockholders; unlike the power of government, it is unchecked by the people; unlike the power of churches, it is unchecked by any firmly established canons of value.”

The Reece Committee began it’s investigation with ‘specific determinations requested by the Congress H. Res. 217, namely’:

  • have Foundations – used their resources for purposes contrary to those for which they were established?
  • used their resources for purposes which can be classed as un-American?\
  • used their resources for purposes which can be regarded as subversive?
  • used their resources for political purposes?
  • resorted to propaganda in order to achieve the objectives for which they have made grants?

It was determined early in the investigation that its scope would need to be broadened to include several other ‘accessory agencies’ including: The American Council of Learned Societies; the National Research Council; the Social Science Research Council; the American Council on Education; the National Education Association; the League for Industrial Democracy; the Progressive Education Association; the American Historical Association; John Dewey Society; and the Anti-Defamation League. The first three of which, having several constituent, associate and institutional members of their own, and who were vessels for the funding of social science scholarships, i.e., history, economics, sociology, psychology, political science, statistics, and anthropology.

The fourth, The American Council on Education served as the coordinating mechanism on a regional and national level. The National Education Association was a monopolistic representative of the ‘great body of teachers’ able to control and administer to the entire poulation of teachers. The League for Industrial Democracy was originally known as the Intercollegiate Socialist Society, which promoted socialism and was the equivalent to the Fabian Society in England. The Progressive Education Association was also a divisive entity that promoted ‘the idea that the individual must be adjusted to the group as a result of his or her educational experience, and that democracy is little more than a system for cooperative living.’ The American Historical Association released a report in 1926 in which it concluded that “the day of the individual in the United States had come to an end and that the future would be characterized, inevitably, by some form of collectivism and an increase in the authority of the State.” And The John Dewey Society’s role was that of ‘conducting research in the field of education and promoting the educational philosophy of John Dewey’, namely the institution and promotion of progressive education.

The Reece Committee concluded that:

The broad study which called our attention to the activities of these organizations has revealed not only their support by Foundations, but has disclosed a degree of cooperation between them which they have referred to as “an interlock”, thus indicating a concentration of influence and power. By this phrase they indicate they are bound by a common interest rather than a dependency upon a single source for capital funds. It is difficult to study their relationship without confirming this. Likewise it is difficult to avoid the feeling that their common interest has led them to cooperate closely with one another and that this common interest lies in the planning and control of certain aspects of American life through a combination of the Federal Government and education.

The Reece Committee’s final report further summarized that these organizations, institutions and societies were using their massive financial influence over the social sciences to “transform education into an instrument for social change.”

In summary, our study of these entities and their relationship to each other seems to warrant the inference that they constitute a highly efficient, functioning whole. Its product is apparently an educational curriculum designed to indoctrinate the American student from matriculation to the consummation of his education. It contrasts sharply with the freedom of the individual as the cornerstone of our social structure. For this freedom, it seems to substitute the group, the will of the majority, and a centralized power to enforce this will – presumably in the interest of all. Its development and production seems t o have been largely the work of those organizations engaged in research, such as the Social Science Research Council and the National Research Council.

Stepping back to consider all of this in its entirety, one has to ask themselves some important ethical and moral questions regarding the power and influence of these Foundations. Is it within the national interests of the United States to allow an extremely small number of men to dictate a vast interest such as our national education? Is it morally just for a society to allow a few industrialists, on account of their exorbitant wealth, to administer the social direction of an entire nation? The evidence continues to prove that these tax-exempt foundations, who are mandated to remain bi-partisan and free from political affiliations, have most definitely stepped outside the realms of their expertise and even the law; and we see the same destructive results being played out even today.

Whether its Rockefeller – a businessman – donating the land for the creation of the United Nations; Bill Gates – a computer programmer – administering vaccines to impoverished Africans; Bill and Hillary Clinton – lifelong state actors – fleecing the victims of third world countries, or George Soros – a private citizen – using his Open Society Foundation to wield geopolitical influence; these ‘altruistic’, philanthropic, tax-exempt Foundations are enjoying an unfettered power that now undeniably controls governments; shapes global policy; and in turn affect societies around the world on a level disproportionate to their perceived importance. And while they continue to abuse the public trust of Americans, and as the evidence of their failures continues to pile up well beyond anything resembling coincidence or accident; the time to rethink their involvement in our society is long overdue.

You can follow the author Youtube The History of Progaganda

Footnotes:

1. A History of Modern Psychology, Ludy Benjamin, pg 68.

2. The Journal of Libertarian Studies G. Stanley Hall: A Priestly Prophet of a New Dispensation, Clarence J Karier. pg. 2

3. Ibid

4. Ibid

5. Wikipedia Granville Stanley Hall

6. G. Stanley Hall letter to George A. Bullock, November 20, 1909, Clark University Archives, Hall Collection, Box 20.

7. G Stanley Hall, The Education of the Will, Princeton Review (July-December 1882), p. 310.

8. G. Stanley Hall, letter to Sigmund Freud, September 24, 1923, Clark University Archives, Hall Collection, Box 244, Folder 9, pg 2-3. See also John Chynoweth Burnham, ed., “Sigmund Freud and G. Stanley Hall: Exchange of letters,” Psychoanalytic Quarterly 29, no 3 (1960): 314-15.)

9. Hall, G. Stanley (1904) Adolescence: Its Psychology and its Relations to Physiology, Anthropology, Sociology, Sex, Crime, Religioni and Education.

10. Charles E. Strickland and Charles Burgess, Health, Growth, and Heredity: G. Stanley Hall on Natural Education (New York: Teachers College Press, 1965), p. viii

11.Pintner, op. cit., 14

12. National Academy Biographical Memoirs Vol. XXV James McKeen Cattell

13. Ibid.

14. Ibid.

15. Wikipedia.

16. National Academy Biographical Memoirs Vol. XXV James McKeen Cattell 17. Encyclopedia.com Complete Dictionary of Scientific Biography Copyright 2008 Also wikipedia James McKeen Cattell. See also National Academy Biographical Memoirs Vol. XXV. 18. Wikipedia James McKeen Cattell. See also National Academy Biographical Memoirs Vol. XXV.

19. National Academy Biographical Memoirs Vol. XXV. 20. Ibid.

21. Ibid.

22. Ibid

23. Ibid.

24. Ibid.

25. Encyclopedia Britannica, James Mark Baldwin. https://www.britannica.com/biography/James-Mark-Baldwin. See also University of Toronto James Mark Baldwin Museum. psych.utoronto.ca/museum/baldwin.htm

26. Ibid.

Stanford Research Institute: The Changing Images of Man

Stanford Research Institute: The Changing Images of Man

Any student of the rise and fall of cultures cannot fail to be impressed by the role in this historical succession by the image of the future. The rise and fall of images of the future precedes or accompanies the rise and fall of cultures ….In the end, the future may well be decided by the image which carries the greatest spiritual power.

Fred Polak (1973)

Vitruvian Man

 

From the very beginning of human existence, Man has relied upon mythological images and symbolic metaphor to help bring meaning and purpose to his life. Today, we use these images as snapshots in order to define the many evolutionary stages of human history, helping to condense the complexity of each era into a single, easy to understand archetypal symbol. For example, when we think of Man in prehistoric times, we imagine him as a spear wielding master of nature – just as the early cave paintings depicted.

During the Ancient Egyptian era, he became the master of his fellow man and is most commonly represented by the iconic golden image of King Tutankhamen. As scientific method emerged during the Renaissance of early European modern history, Man stepped out from underneath the mystical authority of God to become, not only the dominant force in nature, but the master of the universe – apotheosized by Leonardo Da Vinci’s perfectly proportioned Vitruvian Man. Even more recently, our multi-national, industrialized, globally conscious epoch can be summed up by the image of a tailored suit wearing Modern Man On The Move – trading his spear for a brief case.

These mythological images – or symbolic metaphors – fulfill an important purpose in the evolutionary process, helping Man not only understand who he is but who he was, and most importantly who he will become in the future. Without these strong self-images Man loses his sense of identity, the very structure of society can fragment and the risk of losing our meaning and purpose becomes a very plausible reality.

 

The Modern Man on the Move. Briefcase Man

 
 

As we have seen over the last several decades, it certainly seems as though Man has lost grip with his true identity. Our Western world is undergoing such a drastic technological transformation that it has proven increasingly more difficult to define Man with a single iconic image and this is characterized by today’s massive societal instability and unprecedented chaos that threatens to overturn our Western traditions and values. It certainly should come as no surprise that, as we analyze the cause and effect of unbridled technological advancement: like how the division of labour reduced once fulfilling lives to the most mechanized, menial of tasks; or how urbanization led to an unhealthy dependency upon institutions; or, how the standardization of the Western school system robbed Man of his individuality, that we are now seeing a crisis of identity unfolding in this most nondescript of eras – an era that can only be defined by its inability to be defined.

Following the 1960’s, a large section of the population became disillusioned. People began voluntarily disengaging from society in search of an meaningful identity but failed to find one in a culture driven by faceless commoditization and consumption. At the time of Stanford Research Institute’s study in the 1970’s, society had already existed without a true sense of purpose or meaning for a considerable length of time, and according to the experts, this lack of a strong self-image was having an immense negative impact on western society as a whole. The Western world was in desperate need of an image makeover. But, what would the next image of Man look like? And, in what direction would this image take us? These were the questions that a small group of scientists and consultants working out of Stanford University in Santa Clara Valley California (soon to be known around the world as Silicon Valley) were determined to answer.

 

“Might it be possible that a more adequate image of humankind could lead to a renewed sense of wholeness and to better behavior-both individual and collective?” pg. 15.

 
 
 

Published originally in 1974, and revised in 1982, The Changing Images of Man was the culmination of an eight month study administered by the Urban and Social Systems Division of the Stanford Research Institute. As they explain in the introduction, various intellectuals from the fields of social sciences, humanities, engineering and physics collaborated in an attempt to:

“1) illuminate ways our present society, its citizens, and institutions have been shaped by the underlying myths and images of the past and present.

2) Explore the deficiencies of currently held images of humankind and to identify needed characteristics of future images and,

3) Identify high-leverage activities that could facilitate the emergence of new images and new policy approaches to the resolution of key problems in society.” Essentially, the basis of their study was to identify and consider the viability and efficacy of all the possible ways in which they could socially engineer the American public towards a new self-image. The key research staff at SRI was led by Project Director O.W. Markley and assisted by an Advisory Panel with several well known public figures including world famous behaviorist B.F. Skinner from the Harvard Department of Psychology; Henry Margenau from the Department of Physics at Yale; well known cultural anthropologist Margaret Mead from the American Museum of Natural History; and popular mythologist and author of The Hero With A Thousand Faces, Joseph Campbell.

 

“Society grows ever more complex, specialized and interconnected, and the production and distribution of essential goods and services is increasingly dependent on the continued integrity of human institutional systems. Human systems, however, depend on trust, agreement, and political law rather than on unchanging “natural” law, hence they are inherently less stable in times of rapid cultural change than are “natural” systems. They are particularly sensitive to breakdowns caused by war, terrorism and simplistic attempts at societal reform.” pg. 10

 

Within the three hundred page report, the researchers at SRI identified seven different functions of society in which the power of images could be used to acquiesce the population into a state of subservience. These functions were mainly derived from Joseph Campbell’s previous work on mythology and his knowledge of past civilizations. They included: mystical, cosmological, sociological, pedagogical or psychological, editorial, political and magical. Contained within these 7 functions are the many institutions, government agencies, organizations and groups that serve as authorities in society. While the researchers found Joseph’s mystical and magical functions to be largely ineffective due to the public’s inability to consider the former anything more than superstition and the latter to be negatively associated with the diminishing power of the church, they did find the other functions worthy of further exploration.

 

The cosmological function is “to form and present images of the universe and world in accord with local knowledge and experience. This function is performed in our society today by the scientific community and we see a grossly exaggerated reliance on the word of scientific ‘experts’ and the emergence of a new quasi-religion called ‘scientism’.

The sociological function enjoys perhaps the widest interpretation and includes the social sciences, various social programs, special interest groups, non-profit organizations, non-governmental organizations as well as mass communication, Hollywood, and the entertainment industry. Today this function most assuredly includes social media giants like Google, YouTube, Facebook, Yahoo! and Twitter – all of which just happen to have got their start mere miles away from SRI within the city boundaries of downtown San Jose California, right in the heart of Silicon Valley.

The pedagogical or educational function includes the public school system as well as the higher learning institutions of academia and has proven to be most effective in shaping the direction of western society. Today, both the public classroom and the university campus have become perfect breeding grounds for the enforcement of social order and the manufacturing of public opinion and are now the ideological battleground upon which the very fabric of western values and traditions are being viciously shredded to pieces – primarily led by violent, ill-informed protests at Berkeley University, which just happens to be located in Oakland, just north of Stanford.

The editorial function of society is performed by the “funding agencies (government legislatures and departments of program planning, foundations, and so forth) who also represent special interests in the selection of which aspects of reality should be collectively ignored and which attended to”. Today foundations like Ford, Carnegie, Rockefeller, Gates and Open Society all play major roles in the shaping of society not only domestically but on an international scale. (see my previous articles, Philanthropic Foundations and Why They Are A Problem, and How Foundations Created Academia in which I go into further detail).

The political function is distinct from the strictly sociological function and “appears wherever a myth or institution of society is deliberately employed to represent the claim to privilege and authority of some special person, race, social class, nation or civilization”. Today our society has been inundated with these types of social justice authorities demanding equality of race, class, gender, and ethnicity.

 

According to the Changing Images of Man, the authoritative powers within the above mentioned 7 functions were then applied to all four “sources of societal problems” in order to affect the very beliefs, values and perceptions of society. These four levels are made up of: (1) the state of society, (2) behaviour, (3) motivations, and (4) basic values. As figure 7 demonstrates below, we see how the state of society can be directly affected by the individual actions and behaviours of its citizens. The scientists and researchers at SRI had rightly concluded that it is upon the foundation of our basic values and perceptions that our motivations are built; and our motivations will manifest themselves into reality through our behaviour while our collective behaviour as a society ultimately determines the general state of our society as a whole. Which raises the obvious question most pertinent to this specific discussion. Where do our values and perceptions come from?

The stability of the State no matter the ideology is entirely dependent upon the behaviour of its citizens. And those behaviours triggered by motivations stemming from our perception of basic values first established in early childhood and then reinforced through the repetition of Norbert Weiner’s feedback loop. This constant entrainment a necessary aspect in the maintaining of order. 

Our beliefs, values, and perceptions originate from our culture. In fact, they are a direct result of the above mentioned 7 functions of society. We are born into an already well established set of cosmological, sociological, pedagogical or psychological, editorial, political, magical and mythical beliefs that we are forced to adopt for fear we may fail to conform within the larger societal belief system. The SRI referred to this process of indoctrination as the “directed emotional conditioning” of children. pg. 170
As we grow older and gain more information, our values and beliefs and perceptions are further implanted within us in much the same way a plant photosynthesizes the energy of the sun – what SRI called “objectively constructed reinforcement patterns” pg. 170. We become a product of our environment. Those who step outside this construct are quickly stigmatized as social outliers – contemptible contrarians who are then ridiculed into submission by the majority. The very existence of this social construct depends heavily on the effectiveness of both our initial conditioning and the subsequent reinforcement of patterns. Of course, this was well understood by the assembled scientists at SRI. Interestingly, the shaping of thought in order to steer society in a predetermined direction is the very definition of brainwashing. The only thing left for SRI to decide was which of the many techniques proposed would be implemented? What behaviour modification strategies would prove most effective in the establishment of a more docile, benevolent society? These questions formed the heart of the study.
 

“Only if such mentalistic and pre-scientific concepts as will, freedom, and consciousness, and so forth are cast off, Skinner asserts, does man have a chance to attain a truly peaceful, rational, and humane society in the future.” B.F. Skinner, pg. 30

 

The research staff at SRI left no stone unturned in their search for ways to inculcate the masses, even considering the viability of telekinesis, bio feedback, telepathy, clairvoyance, precognition, hypnosis, subliminal messaging, hallucinogenics and psychotropic drugs. Each strategy was identified and discussed at length over the 8 month study then summarized within Chapter 4, Influence of Science on the “Image of Man”. The study called upon behavioural scientist B.F. Skinner to offer his expertise on the examination of ‘man as a mechanism’ and to elaborate on his operant conditioning techniques. Also discussed was the viability of “genetic modification”(6); “brain surgery to prevent aggressive behaviour”; “electrical brain implants”; and “sophisticated electronic surveillance mechanisms to detect ‘aberrant’ behaviour patterns”. Incredibly, they also “proposed the development of chemically based “psychotechnologies”, (primarily to bring control over the tendencies of national leaders, in an attempt to lower the possibility of nuclear war)”. SRI also “urged the development of a ‘psycho-civilized’ society such that dangerous behavior in man can be modified by electrical stimulation of the brain” while they also considered the “profound moral questions” that arise from such activities “which, if unresolved, might propel civilization toward Brave New World and 1984”. pg. 170, 84.

 

The branch of this school of thought which has proved most successful emphasizes the technique of operant conditioning, a term originated by B. F. Skinner to denote a systematic procedure whereby the actions of an organism are brought under control by giving it a reward if and only if it behaves in a specified manner. This technique has been successfully used-in education, psychotherapy, and in prisons to alter whole behavior patterns of individuals. Certainly, the techniques that have been developed within the view of “man as mechanism” are powerful and efficient. They work. Hence if integrated and reconciled with other views of man – views which have more adequate ethics and metaphysics (both terms that the behavioristic scientist insists are not part of his concern) on which to guide their application – this view and its products could conceivably be of great benefit to mankind. pg. 30

 
 

The psychotropic drug scenario proposed by SRI was eerily reminiscent of Aldous Huxley’s Soma, and was found to be one of the more easy to apply. Nearly forty years later, we are witness to the horrific results. Coincidentally or not, the dramatic upward statistical trend of prescription drug use in America began in the years immediately following SRI’s report and is only matched by the rising death toll attributed to it. A seemingly never ending list of antidepressants, anti-psychotics, mood stabilizers, and hypnotic sedatives like Adderall, Ambien, Ativan, Dexedrine, Lithium, Paxil, Prozac, Ritalin, Valium, Zanax and Zoloft have continued to flood the market ever since. As those who lived through the 1980’s would know, the number of prescription drugs on the market was relatively minimal to what we see now. According to recent statistics compiled by the CDC, nearly half of the US population was on at least one prescription drug during the years 2011 – 2014; one quarter of the population was on two; and 10% were on five or more (1)(!) According to more recent research published by the Journal of the American Medical Association, the number of Americans on prescribed drugs in 2015 was 59%, while those on five or more jumped to 15%.(2) In another report, the American Psychological Association found a threefold increase in the use of antidepressants from the years 1988 to 2002 (3) while research compiled by David Muzina, MD, a psychiatrist at the Medco Neuroscience Therapeutic Resource Center found that the number of children receiving atypical anti-psychotics doubled from 2000 to 2010.(4)

 

In the year 2018, we have the immense advantage of hindsight with which we can evaluate the situation more closely and even cursory analysis of the statistics reveal a rather unsettling trend. To even the most ardent advocate of psychotropics there remains a disturbing condition worthy of future consideration. Firstly, it is undeniable that prescription drug use exploded in the years immediately following Stanford’s report, resulting in some unintended consequences; and these consequences are further being substantiated by an ever growing mountain of corroborating statistical evidence. And now, with the addition of Changing Images of Man as primary source material indicating both intent and motive, it becomes entirely possible that this has been a premeditated, coordinated scheme to drug an entire nation into submission. Even the eternal optimist must admit that the numbers are indicative of a deeply corrupted, degenerate system that risks growing completely out of control. And to those that remain skeptical of the conclusions being drawn herein I invite you to research the sources cited as they are offered for your perusal below. I challenge those doubters to research the ever-widening medical qualifications for depression, attention deficit disorder and the absurdity of a future in which the entire population of North America – over 350,000,000 people – are diagnosed by alleged experts as either depressed, psychotic or both.

 

A rather different approach to understanding (and controlling) behavior, also of proven effectiveness, is through the implementation of remotely activated electrodes in the brain. The “psycho-civilization of society” has been advocated by means of various techniques of behavior modification such as operant conditioning (Skinner, 1971), electrocranial stimulation (Delgado, 1969), and psychochemical drugs (Clark, 1971). Only if such mentalistic and prescientific concepts as will, freedom, consciousness, and so forth are cast off, Skinner asserts, does man have a chance to attain a truly peaceful, rational, and humane society in the future.” pg. 30

 

This conveniently leads me to the next strategy proposed by the SRI in which they deliberated the advantages and disadvantages of a public opinion dependent on the word of ‘experts’. This phenomenon, they say, resulting from the general public’s inability to keep up with an increasingly more complex society; that without adequate time to research for themselves, the masses would become overly dependent on the opinions of experts. And as anyone who has studied the Trivium will be aware, this reliance on expert opinion amounts to nothing more than a logical fallacy – the argumentum ad auctoritatum. Yet when we turn on the television or open a newspaper we are continuously asked, ad nauseam, to accept simple two word phrases like “experts say” as the irrefutable truth and today this has resulted in enormous consequences to society that SRI even predicted – as evidenced by the following excerpt:

 

“…the viability of a democracy depends upon the informed decision-making capacity of its citizenry, i.e. the “relative political maturity” of the people must at least maintain parity with the complexity of the issues confronting the public. If the acquisition of relevant knowledge

does not proceed at about the same pace at which the decisions become complex, then relative political maturity will decline. This may have two consequences:

(1) increasing reliance placed upon the “expert” to maintain order and control, with a resulting compromise of our democratic processes, or

(2) reluctance to give control to the “expert” but, with an increasing inability to make informed decisions, the result is that the system may truly go ‘out of control.'” pg. 61

 
 

In consideration of the readers time, an effort has been made to keep this blog within reasonable limitations, which dissuades the author from enumerating on all of the possible scenarios discussed within the pages of the Changing Images of Man, however I do wish to cover one final one. One in which the researchers at SRI considered a scenario involving what they referred to as “friendly fascism”. A scenario described by its creators, Gross and Bertram, that would “severely reduce individual freedoms….under the slogans of democracy and 100 percent Americanism…in the form of an advanced technological society, supported by its techniques – a techno-urban fascism, American style”. And when one compares the points proposed below for a fascist society, with the world today, we see a striking similarity unable to be explained away by mere coincidence. For anyone above the age of forty who have asked themselves how the image of our world can change so drastically within the last couple of decades, the following selection may provide some clarity:

• Application of military surveillance technologies to urban police problems.

• Utilization of behavior-changing drugs and operant conditioning in schools.

• Government attempts at management of news.

• “Personality screening” and maintenance of files on “pre-delinquent” children,

through cooperation between elementary school administrations and local, state, and

federal authorities.

• The cross-correlation of computer-based files containing personal data (e.g. credit,

employment records, tax status, insurance, criminal record, education).

• The introduction of legislation to control access to techniques for self-initiated

alteration of consciousness (both non-drug and drug induced). pg. 170, 171.

 

It is interesting that within a decade of publishing the Changing Images of Man, we see the meteoric rise of both Silicon Valley and the world wide web; both originating directly from out of this innocuous private research institute colloquially known as the Farm. Through the use of primary source material, we see the blueprint from which a plan is devised to socially engineer the American public through it’s various institutions and agencies, followed by the establishment of the very tools to best facilitate the plan.(!) We also see a deep military affiliation with the project in that the internet stems directly from out of the Pentagon’s Arpanet program and the Stanford Research Institute is one of three original hubs for the internet (see diagram below), as early as 1969. Stanford University is centered within a few miles radius of all of the social media giants Google, YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, Yahoo!, and all of these survivors of the dotcom era have major ties to the US intelligence community while also conveniently forming the main framework that is social media.

Is it just coincidence that these were the lucky few to survive the dotcom crash and then go on to dominate the web? Today, we see the Defense Department investing billions of dollars of venture capital into Silicon Valley technology and it’s a harder argument to make that this is all by accident or coincidence than it is to argue that it is by design. Especially when we compare the proposed strategies covered above with what has manifested within society today. There remains no doubt in this author’s mind that The Stanford Research Institute’s Changing Images of Man is a playbook from which originated a plan of full spectrum dominance over society that, as of the writing of this article, has progressed to near completion.

 
 
 
 
 

Today, it certainly seems as though society has become directionless, rudderless. And maybe all of the ‘hither to and fro’ of technology has served to mask the deeper issue of societal stagnation. The once archetypal image of the family-orientated, nuclear father of the 50’s has been persuaded to shun the responsibility of manhood and embrace narcissistic perpetual leisure, and as one looks around, there is considerable evidence to suggest this to be true.  As a society, we seem to lack a clear picture of where we are going or what we are supposed to do next and as we wait for the next image to appear, we will continue to endure chaos. What will the next Image of Man look like? Will he adapt to the imminently approaching era of digital, distributive networks? Maybe he has fallen victim to the trans-humanist movement and will emerge from behind the curtain only half of a man and half a machine. Perhaps he continues down his present path and becomes a simulacrum of a man – a soulless caricature of his former self in the image of Homer Simpson or Peter Griffin. At this point, no one knows for sure, but what is alarming is that as the social science experts; television talking heads; and the authorities of State, forcibly remove the word Man from our vocabulary, and the word son from even our national anthems, any way you choose to look at it, Man as we have known him is quickly disappearing. And it is the opinion of the author that we must initiate this image ourselves because if we allow a totalitarian government to provide it, we most certainly will not like the image that we are given, and the perfect antidote to a tyrannical authority remains a well developed, intelligent individual.

 

You can follow the author on Twitter, Gab, Bitchute, Steemit, Trooth and Minds @TriviumMethod and on Facebook as Duane Hayes/ Diego Garcia and on YouTube at The History of Propaganda.

References:

1. Health United States Report 2016. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hus/hus16.pdf#079

2. Washington Post article https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2015/11/03/more-americans-than-ever-are-taking-prescription-drugs/?utm_term=.6fd7023b6462

3. American Psychological Association http://www.apa.org/monitor/feb08/atleastone.aspx

4. Medscape https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/753789

5. https://ia802900.us.archive.org/10/items/ChangingImagesOfMan/ChangingImagesOfMan-OCR.pdf