Fearful Foundations and the Establishment
Secretive activities aimed to bring about a revolution in the United States. The purpose was to weaken and degrade the population, making them more controlled and malleable.
Well, I’m certainly not a conspiracy *theorist*. When people take that position I have to laugh because I feel sorry for them. They’ve obviously never read a history book because anyone who knows anything about history knows that it’s built on conspiracies from one end to the other. Conspiracy is the engine of history. Every major event in history when you examine it has come to pass largely as a result of at least one and in many cases, *many* conspiracies.
G. Edward Griffin
Executive Summary
Introduction: Norman Dodd led the Reece Committee, which studied tax-exempt foundations in the 1950s. He found that these foundations support activities and groups that promote socialism in America. He claimed they were trying to influence public opinion through education and media.
The Dodd Interview: During a 1982 interview, Norman Dodd and G. Edward Griffin discussed secret actions by tax-exempt foundations in the 1950s. Because of worries about subversive activities, Congress created a committee. Rep. Carroll Reece led the Committee. Their thorough investigation revealed surprising revelations, including interviews and onsite record inspections. These foundations manipulated public opinion, education, and politics through propaganda and influence. They also had sizeable grant-making power. They aimed to weaken Congress, promote socialist laws, and control the executive branch. They wanted to establish an autocratic system and undermine real education.
The Foundations: The Foundations of Interest include the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Ford Foundation, and the Rockefeller Foundation.
Hidden in Plain Sight: Professor Carroll Quigley wrote books called Tragedy and Hope and The Anglo-American Establishment. These books support the claims. The contents build on what the Dodd Report found about a secret group’s power. Charlotte Iserbyt worked for the Department of Education. She also discusses how foundations played a role in the decline of education. Her book The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America provides copious examples of this influence.
Back to the Future: The world has dramatically changed since the Soviet Union collapsed, especially Russia’s role. Russia used to support the original plan. Yet, they now oppose influential foundations and international entities. Russia’s departure from a progressive, collectivist worldview has made it a target for Western elites. These elites are in a complex geopolitical competition with China and Russia. They are vying for control in the pursuit of a New World Order. It is like a high-stakes global domination game.
Introduction
Norman Dodd (1899-1987) was an American businessman and investigator known for his work as the Reece Committee’s research director. The Reece Committee was a United States House of Representatives body established in 1953, chaired by Congressman B. Carroll Reece (1889-1961). The Committee investigated tax-exempt foundations.
Dodd’s most significant contribution came during his investigation by explicitly focusing on the activities of major philanthropic organizations. The Committee sought to examine whether these foundations were using their funds for activities that may have been contrary to the best interests of the United States.
During his investigation, Norman Dodd uncovered substantial efforts by these foundations to promote ideologies and support educational institutions that influenced public opinion in favor of collectivism and socialism. Dodd’s allegations were based on his interpretation of the foundations’ efforts to shape American education and the media.
The Dodd Interview
During a 1982 interview with Norman Dodd, G. Edward Griffin sheds light on prominent tax-exempt foundations. These foundations include but are not limited to Carnegie, Ford, and Council on Foreign Relations - in the early 1950s. Congress formed an investigative committee in response to concerns about potential subversive activities. Rep. Carroll Reece headed the Committee and examined these foundations.
The investigation involved many interviews. The Committee conducted a detailed examination of the foundations’ private records onsite. The findings were surprising. It revealed that these foundations engaged in un-American and subversive activities. They used propaganda, influence, and their significant grant-making power. They use media and advertising to control public opinion. Additionally, they worked to control education and infiltrate institutions. They exerted their influence over power centers.
Their main goal was to undermine authentic education through indoctrination. Also, they used their social influence and institutional power to push for socialist laws and global policies. At the same time, they aimed to weaken Congress. They worked to give more power to the executive branch to weaken Congress. The cabal created an autocratic system by debasing the constitutional hallmark of the legislative branch. Through secrecy, they controlled the executive branch. That included the President making it easy to manipulate and direct the government to achieve its hidden goals.
In the interview, it becomes evident that certain foundations have gone to great lengths to manipulate public opinion. They dominate education and sway political decision-making in their favor. This is often at the cost of “democracy” and the welfare of the masses.
These secretive activities aimed to bring about a revolution in the United States. The purpose was to weaken and degrade the population, making them more controlled and malleable. The plan was to demoralize and debase individuals to discourage them from standing up for their principles. It muted cogent-minded people to unite with others to address societal problems. Instead, they would contribute to the deterioration of society.
The strategy relied on manipulating people’s focus and priorities. This “machine” targeted those who cared about personal indulgence. That included people who “feel special” and pursue material possessions. Those in power could then reward or punish them as needed, maintaining their authority over the population. That was the condition desired by the individuals associated with these foundations. It is akin to “bread and circus.”
Yet, the reasons for their actions ran even more profound. The director of the Ford Foundation, Rowan Gaither, made a significant disclosure. Many foundation members had served in government roles. For example, the Office of Strategic Services (the CIA’s predecessor) or the Economic Cooperation Administration. These agencies operated under the White House’s guidance. Gaither further revealed that they still followed similar directives. That entailed utilizing their grant-making authority to change life in the United States. The ultimate aim was to unite the United States with the Soviet Union.
The merger had two consequences. First, it combined capitalist democracy and socialism, resulting in technocratic corporate fascism. This change occurred gradually for many years and is now in quick step. Second, the idea of convergence arose, imagining the literal merging of the United States and the Soviet Union. The goal included merging the rest of the world into a uniform global governance system, the New World Order. This system would then be overseen by a socialist world government that benefits a wealthy oligarchic elite.
To sum it up, the foundation elites had a hidden agenda to revolutionize the United States. They worked to debase society’s structure and make people more obedient and manageable. Their ultimate goal went beyond national boundaries. The intent: merge all the world’s systems into a single socialist world government.
The Dodd Report
The impact of the Dodd Report was nothing short of astonishing. Almost immediately, efforts were mobilized to obstruct any meaningful investigation. For example, The Atlantic periodical published Undermining the Foundations in 1954. Within the confines of Capitol Hill, the Committee encountered obstacles at every step. The entire nation was inundated with narratives that either outright claimed or subtly implied that the investigation was futile and possibly even detrimental.
Notably, the national board of Americans for Democratic Action formally urged the House to disband its Committee. In a move like we see today, it alleged that it was launching an outright assault on the pursuit of knowledge itself. Conversely, numerous citizens held a different perspective, advocating for establishing a permanent Standing Committee of the House to collect and assess the facts uncovered by such investigations diligently.
The Committee investigated and studied dozens of foundations and endowments. The more prominent entities studied included the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, the Carnegie Endowment for the Advancement of Education, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Ford Foundation, and the Rockefeller Foundation.
The Foundations
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Andrew Carnegie (1835-1919) created the Endowment for International Peace (CEIP). He gave the Trustees a lot of freedom to decide what measures and policies to use. He said their main goal should be ending conflicts between civilized nations. Nicholas Murray Butler (1862-1947) was a Republican and President of Columbia University. He was a powerful Trustee for the CEIP. Butler believed in global cooperation and loved England, like Carnegie’s desire to unite the U.S. and British Empire.
Yet, Butler’s concern for Britain’s fate during World War I led him to deviate from pursuing “international peace.” Instead, he advocated for the United States’ involvement in the European war. The CEIP’s first big project was about using money to intervene. After the battle, Butler ensured Britain’s safety and led the Trustees to support the League of Nations. They also started a campaign to encourage Americans to have a global perspective. Butler titled one of his books The International Mind.
From 1910 to 1925, Elihu Root (1845-1947) served as the President of the CEIP and aligned with Butler’s ideas as an internationalist. Butler became President from 1925 to 1945. The CEIP became a top advocate for internationalism. The 1925 Yearbook of the CEIP had a goal: to shape public opinion and push governments and officials toward progress. In the CEIP’s lexicon, constructive progress meant promoting internationalism.
The Reece Committee analyzed the CEIP’s program, focusing on building a powerful propaganda system. To achieve its goals, it made materials and worked with clubs, media, publishers, and agencies.
The CEIP shared books written by Communists, Socialists, pro-Communists, and left-wing internationalists. The Foreign Policy Association and the Institute of Pacific Relations gave books to the “International Relations Clubs and Centers.” The books had a left-leaning viewpoint and sometimes included a Communist perspective. It exposed university students. At the same time, CEIP exerted considerable influence on the State Department. Starting in 1934, the CEIP became an informal tool for international policy. It tackled complex issues and influenced government policies. The CEIP personnel and its subsidized Council on Foreign Relations influenced government decisions. They consulted with and had an impact on the government.
Alger Hiss (1904-1996) succeeded Butler as the President of the CEIP in 1947. Hiss, known for his subversive reputation, took office amid controversy. The CEIP continued its work on behalf of the United Nations during Hiss’s tenure. In 1953, they created the Carnegie International Center near the United Nations headquarters in 1953. CEIP created the Foreign Policy Association-World Affairs Center in 1957. They wanted to tell or persuade leaders from different areas about the good things the United Nations does.
Carnegie Endowment for the Advancement of Education
The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Training began in 1905. It is now called the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
The Dodd 1954 report revealed many different aspects of the Carnegie Foundation. It went beyond being a charitable organization. People accused the Foundation of influencing education. This is an essential element in shaping young minds.
The report claimed that the Carnegie Foundation’s influence was widespread in teaching methods. The Foundation’s goals went beyond teaching—it aimed to change how schools taught essential subjects.
A strong claim emerged in this framework: the Endowment was trying to discredit America’s essential figures. The report claimed that the Foundation attempted to damage the reputation of the Founding Fathers and the Constitution. The Foundation set its sights on eroding the reverence for free enterprise capitalism. The supposed efforts aimed to promote collectivism. They also wanted to redistribute wealth.
Embedded within the report were claims that delved into subtler realms of influence. The Endowment funded research that challenged private property rights and individualism. The implication suggested that these concepts portrayed relics of a bygone era.
The report’s allegations extended into the very curriculum structure of educational institutions. The Endowment funded changes to the curriculum. The changes focused on class struggle, supported labor unions, and questioned American values.
The narrative showed how the Endowment helps shape how young people see history and values. Philanthropy and ideology shape educational foundations, creating a complex web of influence.
Council on Foreign Relations
The Dodd Reports revealed the true nature of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). It is an exclusive group, selected through invitation only, with the explicit goal of shaping U.S. foreign policy. The book unveiled a connection between the CFR and the Carnegie, Rockefeller, and Ford Foundations. These giant financial supporters help fund the CFR and keep it running.
In an unfolded narrative, the CFR was under the critical scrutiny of allegations. One of the main arguments was that the organization supported internationalism over nation-states. Someone suggested this approach to diminish national autonomy. The report made a strong claim. It said that the CFR supports complex global governing systems.
The allegations claimed that the CFR, with only 1,700 members, had a significant influence. Yet, this small group had a firm hold on power. They held important positions in government, media, academia, and influential foundations. The report portrayed a nexus of authority interwoven into critical sectors of society.
The report revealed a secret orchestra, with the CFR acting as a hidden network. According to the report, when alone, people focus on common goals instead of talking. This notion reshaped the perception of the CFR from a public forum to a clandestine nexus of influence.
The story hinted that being part of the CFR influenced foreign policy appointments. This claim described a group with too much influence over the country’s global path.
The report showed that the CFR is a mysterious institution. A select group of people linked to powerful financial forces make it up. The CFR has a substantial impact on U.S. foreign policy. The story focused on the unclear line between open discussions and hidden influence. This left readers to think about what this meant.
As a bonus, Vice President Joe Biden spoke at the CFR, bragging about his interventions in Ukraine:
Ford Foundation
In 1936, the Ford Foundation was incorporated in Michigan. Its donors were Henry Ford (1863-1947) and his son Edsel Ford (1893-1943). The report examined the Ford Foundation and accused it of manipulating resources. Critics said the manipulation went against American values. It supported a more significant government role.
The Dodd report showed that instead of helping, people called the Ford Foundation’s money “propaganda.” The funding wanted to weaken American values and support a bigger government.
The Ford Foundation focused on funding research in social science to alter public attitudes. They wanted to change people’s thoughts about individualism, private property rights, and free markets. The plan aimed to change people’s thinking and make them more open to group ideas.
Illustrative examples cited in the report painted a picture of a calculated effort. The Ford Foundation-backed projects that encouraged global cooperation, planned economies, and sharing wealth. These initiatives stood as tangible manifestations of the reported agenda.
The report said the Ford Foundation wanted to shape young minds by changing education and stories. They didn’t focus on the present. They singled out the teaching of American history as a prime target. The Foundation wanted people to doubt free enterprise and support economic planning. It also questioned the intentions of the Founding Fathers and the Constitution.
Yet, the report didn’t stop at the realm of education. The Ford Foundation also supported organizations that weakened Congressional committees investigating communism. Additionally, people accused it of encouraging media self-censorship, which supports the alleged agenda.
The report’s conclusion caused concern. It said the Ford Foundation influences education and media. They want to change the thinking of future leaders, moving away from limited government. The story showed a purposeful effort to change the country’s core beliefs.
The Reece Committee noticed an article in The Corporate Director from April 1954. The article talked about a study on the Ford Foundation. The study showed that the Ford family members, who were officers in the Ford Company, could get salaries. This helped them have income and let the company operate without paying dividends.
At first, the Ford Foundation directed its grants toward charitable endeavors in Michigan. After Henry and Edsel Ford died, the Foundation started doing more work worldwide. In 1949, the Ford family and other trustees gave employees more control over the Foundation’s programs. The Report of the Study for the Ford Foundation on Policy and Program, dated November 19, 1949, prompted this shift. The trustees accepted the report. It recommended that individual trustees avoid getting involved in technical details. The Foundation focused on giving its President and officers the freedom to develop programs. They wanted to avoid having any control over the projects funded by the Foundation.
In 1951 and 1952, the Ford Foundation gave grants to the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC). The Foundation officers believed that the AFSC had shown its ability to reduce tensions between countries. They focused on economic, social, and educational conditions. Before the Ford Foundation helped them, the AFSC, led by Clarence Pickett, supported Communist propaganda for 20 years.
Rockefeller Foundation
The report revealed that the Rockefeller Foundation funded social science projects. That worked to influence society—the initiatives aimed to change long-standing American values and institutions at their core.
To substantiate these claims, they highlighted many instances. The Rockefeller Foundation funded projects that promoted globalism, collectivism, and moral relativism. Traditional beliefs in nationalism, individualism, and ethical standards were being challenged. These examples portrayed a deliberate effort to pivot societal perspectives.
The report claimed that the Rockefeller Foundation was not a neutral charity. Instead, it pushed to weaken free-market capitalism. The Foundation claimed to support socialism and planned economies, not free enterprise. This “Really Graceful” video shows how far the Rockefellers have worked to debase society:
Hidden In Plain Sight
As a follow-up to the Dodd Report, the works of Professor Carroll Quigley (1910-1777) provide additional proof of this cabal. That includes Tragedy and Hope and The Anglo-American Establishment. Professor Quigley was a historian for the influential Anglo-American dynasties. Known as the Establishment, it held significant sway over the United States. Quigley provides valuable insights into their global agenda, which he supported. Quigley delves into the extensive institutional and organizational networks established by these elites. It spans from finance and commercial banking to industry. The Establishment links to politics and civil society, including major Wall Street foundations. These networks advance the overarching policies and agendas of the oligarchical Establishment.
It is worth noting that Professor Quigley’s written works support the arguments presented by Norman Dodd. This adds more validity to the information shared in this context. Quigley’s writings enable readers to comprehend these powerful groups’ complex operations.
Another author of note is Charlotte Iserbyt (1930-2022). She was a Senior Policy Advisor for the Department of Education in the Reagan administration. Iserbyt is a successful writer who analyzes the influence of foundations in the decline of education. Her noteworthy book is The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America. It highlights how manipulated education and social sciences undermine and weaken communities. This book is a crucial tool for understanding the effects of these foundations on the education system and society in general.
You can gain a thorough and well-documented understanding of the hidden forces shaping society. This is through studying the writings of Professor Carroll Quigley, Charlotte Iserbyt, and many others. As Norman Dodd’s interview revealed, these forces impact various aspects of culture. That includes education, politics, and global agendas.
Back to the Future
As a result of the breakup of the Soviet Union, there has been a shift in the original plan. With many goals achieved, the Soviet remnant (Russia) strikes a different chord with the foundations. They seemingly have cast aside Russia and made her the new enemy based on the following factors:
Russia’s conduct on the global platform is legendary. In annexed Crimea in 2014. It backed separatist movements in Ukraine and intervened in the Syrian civil war. That strained relations with many countries and international organizations. These “actions” and the active fighting in Yukrine contributed to unfavorable views. Russia’s foreign policy and geopolitical aspirations clash with the West’s global ambitions. At the same time, the Western Establishment engaged in nation-building efforts. Under the premise of promoting “democracy,” Afghanistan serves as a pertinent example. That disaster results from the military-industrial complex sucking the economic life out of the West.
The Russian government controls domestic affairs and disseminates state-sponsored propaganda in foreign contexts. There are deliberate efforts to manipulate public opinion and shape a positive image of Russia. These actions have led to apprehensions about the country’s limited media freedom and lack of transparency. For a reality check, replace the word Russia above with “Western Establishment,” and you will see the whole picture.
Russia has faced a “legations of participating in cyberattacks and conducting disinformation campaigns. The intent included influencing elections and fostering division in other nations. These activities have sparked apprehensions about cybersecurity and the preservation of democratic processes. Meanwhile, certain infamous players in the West used a fiat “Rusia, Russia, Russia” mantra for their internal medling purposes.
In response to various geopolitical actions and human rights concerns, many countries have imposed economic sanctions on Russia, leading to economic challenges for the nation and further straining international relations. However, even with the Ukraine-Russia proxy war underway, there are exemptions for Democratic-controlled states like New Jersey (see Russia, Russia, Russia & Ride the Rails).
Russia may not be a bastion of “democracy,” but it has shifted to a more traditional social worldview. That has ignited the ire of the progressive-collectivist elite in the West. Moreover, the war in Ukraine has united the neo-conservatives and progressives and misled moderates to embrace the blue over the yellow. We are sending billions of ghost money and supplying dwindling arms to Ukraine in a proxy war. Oppose that narrative, and you will be tagged as a radical right-wing potential domestic terrorist. Meanwhile, our “leaders” deplete our arms for Volodymyr Oleksandrovych Zelenskyy. That treasonist program occurs under a plot to make our troops into a Barbie Doll battalion in the name of inclusion.
Indeed, Russia is awash with oligarchs and run by the despot Puten. But, again, recall the constant refrain of “Russia, Russia, Russia!” and the unsubstantiated allegations directed at President Trump. The focus was never on “China, China, China!” even though the Chinese Communist Party is a prominent player in predatory globalism. The Chicoms actively engage in economic relations with the politicians, mainstream media, American education, science, and corporate sectors.
It is a three-way competition with the players engaged in the classic board game Risk The Game of Global Domination. The prize: ruling the New World Order. The players: Western Establishment, China, and Russia.
Bonus!
Live and let live
Practice tolerance and allow individuals to lead their own lives. This age-old adage with Dutch roots can be traced back to G. De Malynes’ Ancient Law-Merchant from 1622 and was later included in John Ray’s compilation of English proverbs in 1678. It first appeared in the United States in the writings of John Adams in 1785. A more contemporary twist on this wisdom, “Live and let live as long as all is quiet,” was coined by the novelist John Grisham.
Sources
None Dare Call it Treason 25 Years Later ~ John A. Stormer, 625 pages, Liberty Bell Press, 1992
Biographical Dictionary of the Left, Volume 1 ~ Francis X. Gannon, 616 pages, Western Island Publishers, January 1973,
G. Edward Griffin interviews Norman Dodd on the Reece Committee investigation ~ YouTube
I warmly encourage you to consider becoming a paid subscriber if you have the means. Regardless of your choice, your support is deeply appreciated. From the bottom of my heart, thank you for your invaluable support!
These activities and programs may well be the start to some of my discussions over these coming holiday gatherings. I do believe we need to have these conversations about what is happening all around us with the ones closest to us. Thank you for providing a dish of tasty meats to the table.
SANCUTARY CITY MAYOR NYC Steps Up Program Giving Migrants Taxpayer-Funded Flights Out of City
Democratic Mayor Eric Adams is accelerating a program that involves giving migrants one-way flights to their destination of choice.
Not only are they being flown to other states, but even to other countries, such as Morocco and Colombia. (DRUG CARTELS?)
The mayor’s office has coupled the flights with limits on shelter stays — measures the city says are necessary to make space for new arrivals and reduce the number of people being cared for by the city. Officials believe the policies are working, pointing to statistics that say fewer than 20 percent of the migrants who received 30- and 60-day vacate notices have reapplied to return to city lodging.
https://thenewamerican.com/us/immigration/nyc-steps-up-program-giving-migrants-taxpayer-funded-flights-out-of-city/