The

Conspiracy To Rule The Worldby Gary Allen

THE C.F.R.Conspiracy To Rule The World

Gary Alien, a graduate of Stanford Uni-versity and one of the nation's topauthorities on civil turmoil and the NewLeft, is author of Communist RevolutionIn The Streets - a highly praised anddefinitive volume on revolutionary tacticsand strategies, published by WesternIslands. Mr. Alien, a former instructor ofboth history and English, is active inanti-Communist and other humanitariancauses. Now a film writer, author, andjournalist, he is a Contributing Editor toAMERICAN OPINION. Mr. Alien is alsonationally celebrated as a lecturer.

• To every thoughtful American theforeign policy of the United States hasfor the past three decades been a com-pounding mystery and concern. Adminis-trations have come and gone like the Idesof March, but spring never arrives —leaving America's crusade against interna-tional Bolshevism a matter of mere wordsfrozen in the drifts of a subversive bliz-zard.

As better than a third of the world hasfallen to the Communists, and our sonshave died by the scores of thousands tofight no-win wars from Korea to Viet-nam, Americans have puzzled over whytaxi drivers can understand the threat ofthe International Communist Conspiracywhile the "experts" of the State Depart-ment cannot. But, with a collective shrugof shoulders already over-burdened withmounting taxes, installment payments,and Junior's tuition at Riot Tech, theaverage American chalks up such things asthe massive credit sales of advanced com-puters, metals, or jet engines to theCommunist bloc as mere error — or

stupidity — and goes about his businesswith the fading hope that the nextAdministration will somehow manage tobring to government as much commonsense as that found in taxi drivers.

Such hopes are doomed to disappoint-ment, because most Americans are beingkept totally ignorant of the conspiratorialorganizations whose members have setthe same Leftist policies for the past tenAdministrations. Clearly, these policy-makers are not fools at all, but followingcarefully laid plans for our convergencewith the Soviet Union as the base for adictatorial government of the world. Aslong as the American public remainsignorant of this organized conspiracy,there are just two chances of reversing thecatastrophic momentum of America'sforeign policy: slim and none.

IPERHAPS the nexus of this organized

subversive effort in America is an Estab-lishment-level organization known as theCouncil on Foreign Relations — the secretand incredibly powerful C.F.R. One ofthe extremely infrequent articles concern-ing this Council to appear in the nationalPress was published in the ChristianScience Monitor of September 1, 1961. Itbegan this way:

On the west side of fashionablePark Avenue at 68th Street [in NewYork City] sit two handsome build-ings across the way from eachother. One is the Soviet Embassy tothe United Nations.... Directlyopposite on the southwest corner isthe Council on Foreign Relations -

probably one of the most influ-ential semi-public organizations inthe field of foreign policy.

Although the formal membership inthe C.F.R. is composed of fourteen hun-dred of the most elite names in theworlds of government, labor, business,finance, communications, the founda-tions, and the academy — and despite thefact that it has staffed almost every keyposition of every Administration sincethose of F.D.R. — it is doubtful that oneAmerican in a thousand so much asrecognizes the Council's name, or thatone in ten thousand can describe any-thing at all about its structure or purpose.Indicative of the C.F.R.'s power to main-tain its anonymity is the fact that despiteits having been operative at the highestlevels for nearly fifty years, and havingfrom the beginning counted among itsmembers the foremost lions on the Estab-lishment communications media, I discov-ered after poring over decades of volumesof the Readers' Guide to Periodical Liter-ature that only one magazine article onthe C.F.R. has ever appeared in a majornational journal — and that in Harper's,hardly a mass-circulation periodical. Simi-larly, only a handful of articles on theCouncil have appeared in the nation'sgreat newspapers. Such anonymity — atthat level — can hardly be a matter ofmere chance.

Had it not been for a small group ofhighly informed and concerned Conserva-tives, who have for years painstakinglycombed and cross-referenced the meagermaterials available, the Council's powerand influence would remain a .totalmystery to all except the Insiders incontrol of the C.F.R.* As a result of theattacks by these Conservatives, the wallof secrecy this organization had builtaround itself was greatly reinforced. Intime, although little appeared in the Pressconcerning the C.F.R., rosters of officersand members could only be obtained bysubterfuge from the organization in New

York. In recent years, however, the Coun-cil's membership list has become far morereadily available and can now be obtaineddirectly from the C.F.R. headquarters.

What makes this strange organizationso influential? No one who knows forcertain will say. The Christian ScienceMonitor, which is edited by a member ofthe C.F.R., did note in the article ofSeptember 1, 1961, that "Its roster . . .contains names distinguished in the fieldof diplomacy, government, business, fi-nance, science, labor, journalism, law andeducation. What united so wide-rangingand disparate a membership is a passion-ate concern for the direction of Americanforeign policy."

The C.F.R.'s passionate concern forthe direction of American foreign policyhas amounted to an attempt to makecertain that policy continues marchingLeftward towards World Government.The C.F.R. was criticized for preciselythis by the Reece Committee, a SpecialCommittee of the House of Representa-tives established in 1953 to investigateabuses by tax-free foundations. In thecase of the Council of Foreign Relations,the Committee found that "Its produc-tions are not objective but are directedoverwhelmingly at promoting the global-ism concept."

Despite nearly incredible pressure toremain silent, the Reece Committee dis-closed that the C.F.R. has in fact come tobe almost an employment agency for keyareas of the U.S. Government — "nodoubt carrying its internationalist biaswith it." The investigation also showedthat the C.F.R.'s influence is so great thatit has almost completely usurped theprescribed activities of the U.S. State

*The popular encyclopedia on the C.F.R. andits satellites remains former F.B.I. agent DanSmoot's Invisible Government. Much up-datingmaterial and a list of members for 1966(obtained circuitously) can be found in PhoebeCourtney's The C.F.R. Both books are availablefor one-dollar each from American OpinionLibrary, Belmont, Massachusetts 02178.

Department. The Christian Science Moni-tor confirmed this conclusion as follows:

Because of the Council's single-minded dedication to studying anddeliberating American foreignpolicy, there is a constant flow ofits members from private to publicservice. Almost half of the Councilmembers have been invited toassume official governmentpositions or to act as consultants atone time or another. [Emphasisadded.]

The policies promoted by the C.F.R.in the fields of defense and internationalrelations become the official policies ofthe United States Government with aregularity which defies the laws ofchance. As "Liberal" columnist JosephKraft, himself a member of the C.F.R.,noted of the Council in Harper's of July1958: "It has been the seat o f . . . basicgovernment decisions, has set the contextfor many more, and has repeatedly servedas a recruiting ground for rankingofficials." Kraft, incidentally, aptly titledhis article on the C.F.R., "School ForStatesmen" — an admission that themembers of the Council are drilled with a"line" of strategy to be carried out inWashington.

It thus becomes clear that the bestway to begin to understand what haveseemed to be our insane defense andforeign policies is to take a long, hardlook at the organization which has pro-vided the key staff and direction forthose policies. But one cannot, of course,understand the C.F.R. without first be-coming aware of its background andantecedents. No group becomes so power-ful by chance, and the roots go deep intoconspiracy.

IIUNTIL quite recently the origins of

the C.F.R. have largely seemed, to para-phrase Winston Churchill, a riddle

wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma.The man who let the skunk out of thesack is Carroll Quigley, Professor of Inter-national Relations at Georgetown Univer-sity, who has been a lecturer at theIndustrial College of the Armed Forcessince 1951, and has lectured at theForeign Service Institute of the StateDepartment. Every student of the Inter-national Communist Conspiracy, and ofthe Insiders who manipulate it, will wantto own a copy of the Professor's book,Tragedy And Hope, which provides an im-mense amount of new information on thesubject not available from other sources.*

What makes Professor Quigley's vol-ume doubly interesting is that the Profes-sor, who was allowed access to heretoforesecret materials of certain clandestineEstablishment organizations, is a "Lib-eral" who, while presenting abundantevidence exposing the elitists seeking con-trol of the world through a super-government, does not himself oppose theconspiracy. In fact, he makes it abundant-ly clear that he approves the aims of theInsiders, and scorns those foolish enoughto oppose them. Lest the products of theProfessor's enlightening research, which Ishall subsequently review at length, causeanyone to think Professor Quigley to besome sort of an ivy-festooned avatar ofDan Smoot, let me reassure my "Liberal"readers by citing a few of his characteriza-tions of American Conservatives:

On the whole, the neo-isolation-ist discontent was a revolt of theignorant against the informed oreducated; of the Nineteenth Cen-tury against the insoluble problemsof the Twentieth; of the Midwest ofTom Sawyer against the cosmopoli-tan East of J.P. Morgan and Com-

*Carroll Quigley, Tragedy And Hope, A HistoryOf The World In Our Time, The MacmillanCompany, New York, Collier-Macmillan Lim-ited, London, 1966. Though the volume isnearly 1,350 pages long, it is must reading forthe student of political conspiracy in our time.

pany; of old Siwash againstHarvard; of the Chicago Tribuneagainst the Washington Post or theNew York Times; of simple abso-lutes against complex relativisms; ofimmediate final solutions againstlong-range partial alleviations, offrontier activism against Europeanthought.. ..

Carroll Quigley goes so far as to ridi-cule Conservatives as racist, "petty bour-geois" hysterics defending middle-classmorality. He writes:

The virulence behind the Gold-water campaign had nothing to dowith default or lack of intensity.Quite the contrary. His most ardentsupporters were of the extremistpetty-bourgeois mentality driven tonear hysteria by the disintegrationof the middle classes and the steadyrise in prominence of everythingthey considered anathema: Catho-lics, Negroes, immigrants, intellec-tuals, aristocrats (and near aristo-crats), scientists, and educated mengenerally, people from big cities orfrom the East, cosmopolitans andinternationalists and, above all, lib-erals who accept diversity as avirtue.

It is clear from his writings that Profes-sor Quigley considers himself no Conser-vative but one of the elitist aristocrats(forgive me - or "near aristocrats")destined to eliminate the middle classesand rule the world. It is this colossal,smirking, gall which makes the informa-tion in his book even more illuminatingand frightening. Obviously a creature ofgargantuan ego, talking out of school toinform the world about how clever he isto know the way the world is really run,the Professor commits the most damning"confession against interest" to come outof the Establishment in decades.

Quigley traces the lineage of the C.F.R.

back to Cecil Rhodes, the English adven-turer who amassed a fortune in the goldand diamond mines of Southern Africa.While he follows the conspiracy of theInsiders back no farther than Rhodes, hedoes indicate that it did not begin eventhere. And, he notes that the man whobent Rhodes as a collegiate twig atOxford was the notorious John Ruskin,noting of the conspiracy Ruskin calledthe "new imperialism":

The chief changes were that itwas justified on grounds. .. ofsocial reform and not, as earlier, ongrounds of missionary activity andmaterial advantage.

Ruskin beguiled his students with talesof "England's downtrodden masses," didhis best to fill his aristocratic charges witha sense of profound guilt, convincingthem that their privileged position couldnot be preserved unless their power"could be extended to the lower classesin England itself and to the non-Englishmasses throughout the world." Sosmitten with Ruskin's initial lecture wasRhodes that he copied it in longhand andkept it with him for thirty years.

Ruskin's ideas about using noblesseoblige as justification for the imperialismof the Insiders were used to rationalizepolitical activities aimed at capturing theimmense wealth of Southern Africa forRhodes and the financiers and conspira-tors who were his backers. The indoc-trination by Ruskin was thus turned intoan instrument of conquest by Rhodes, onwhat we are asked to believe was theassumption — according to biographersLockhart and Woodhouse — that God hadchosen Cecil Rhodes to "paint the map ofAfrica red." Rhodes' biographer SaraMillin was a little more direct. As she putit: "The government of the world wasRhodes' simple desire." Quigley notes:

In the middle 1890's Rhodes hada personal income of at least a

million pounds sterling a year (thenabout five million dollars) which hespent so freely for his mysteriouspurposes that he was usually over-drawn on his account. These pur-poses centered on his desire tofederate the English-speakingpeoples and to bring all the habit-able portions of the world undertheir control.

Cecil Rhodes' commitment to a con-spiracy to establish World Governmentwas set down in a series of wills describedby Frank Aydelotte, a founding memberof the C.F.R. and American Secretary tothe Rhodes Trustees, in his book Ameri-can Rhodes Scholarships. Aydelottewrites:

The seven wills which CecilRhodes made between the ages of24 and 46 [Rhodes died at ageforty-eight] constitute a kind ofspiritual autobiography.... Bestknown are the first (the SecretSociety Will. . . ), and the last,which established the RhodesScholarships....

In his first will Rhodes states hisaim still more specifically: "Theextension of British rule through-out the world,.. . the foundationof so great a power as to hereafterrender wars impossible and pro-mote the interests of humanity."

The "Confession of Faith" en-larges upon these ideas. The modelfor this proposed secret society wasthe Society of Jesus, though hementions also the Masons. [Em-phasis added.]

It should be noted that the originatoron the profane level of this type of secretsociety was Adam Weishaupt, the mon-ster who founded the Order of Illumination May 1, 1776, for the purpose ofconspiracy to control the world. The roleof Weishaupt's Illuminists in such horrors

as the Reign of Terror is unquestioned,and the techniques of the Illuminati havelong been recognized as models forCommunist methodology. Weishaupt alsoused the structure of the Society of Jesus(the Jesuits) as his model, and rewrote hisCode in Masonic terms. Aydelotte con-tinues:

. ..In 1888 Rhodes made histhird will.. . leaving everything toLord Rothschild [his financier inmining enterprises], with anaccompanying letter enclosing "thewritten matter discussed betweenus." This, one surmises, consistedof the first will and the "Confessionof Faith," since in a postscriptRhodes says "in considering ques-tions suggested take Constitution ofthe Jesuits if obtainable.... "

Apparently for strategic reasons LordRothschild was subsequently removedfrom the forefront of the scheme. Pro-fessor Quigley reveals that Lord Rosebury"replaced his father-in-law, Lord Roths-

child, in Rhodes' secret group and wasmade a Trustee under Rhodes' next (andlast) will."

The last will of Cecil Rhodes providesfor bringing "Rhodes Scholars" from theEmpire, Germany, and America forschooling in internationalism at Oxford.The plan, according to Rhodes' fellowconspirator, William Stead:

. .. was that after thirty yearsthere would be "between two andthree thousand men in the prime oflife scattered all over the world,each one of whom would haveimpressed upon his mind in themost susceptible period of his lifethe dream of the Founder, each oneof whom, moreover, would havebeen specially - mathematically -selected towards the Founder'spurposes [World Government]...."

Biographer Sara Millin writes of thequalifications for becoming part of thiscadre:

In speaking of these attributes[desirable in Rhodes Scholars] toStead, Rhodes defined them, withthat defensive cynicism of theromantic, as : smugness, brutality,unctuous rectitude, and tact.

At the very time the Rhodes Trustbegan to filter its "scholars" into Oxford,the University was of course comingunder the academic domination ofmembers of the Fabian Socialist Society,providing the Rhodes Scholars not onlywith the intended indoctrination andpreparation to become part of aninternational government, but part of aninternational socialist government.*

Quigley informs us approvingly that itwas the aim of the Rhodes group topromote the economic doctrines taughtin the London School of Economics. He*See Rose Martin, Fabian Freeway, WesternIslands, 1966.

does not mention, however, that theLondon School of Economics wasestablished by the Fabians to teach theeconomics of international socialism. Infact, Professor Quigley is very careful toavoid so much as a mention of the Fabianmovement.

At first glance it would appear that theFabians were working at cross-purposeswith the Rhodes conspiracy since Rhodesis said by his admirers to have wanted toextend "the British Empire" toencompass the entire world, while theFabians wished to dissolve that Empireinto an international socialist Utopia. Yetthe strategy of using Fabian socialismclearly fits. Times were changing and amore subtle and devious approach wasnecessary to accomplish Rhodes' dreamof World Government. The new ideologywas doubtless provided by the Fabians.Those who doubt it have only to note thewell-known influence of the Fabians onthose organizations cited by author FrankAydelotte when he proclaims that thecarefully indoctrinated Rhodes Scholarsfrom America:

. .. have taken a prominent partin the work of such organizations asthe Council on Foreign Relations,the National Policy Committee, theLeague of Nations Association,Union Now, the United NationsAssociation, the Commission Forthe Study of Organization of Peace,the Universities Committee onPost-War International Problems,the Institue of Pacific Relations,the World Peace Foundations, andthe research group attached to theState Department....

Note that all are both Fabian-orientedand working for World Government.More distressing, Aydelotte concludes:"The number of those going intogovernment is constantly increasing."

What happens to Americans passingthrough the Rhodes indoctrination at

Oxford? Frank Aydelotte assures us: "Ifhe have [sic] the capacity for assimi-lation, if he can become a part of what hemeets, he may return from Oxford to theUnited States a citizen of the world."And, there can be little doubt of it. Someof the Rhodes alumni to wear the oldschool tie in our government are DeanRusk (C.F.R.), Walt Whitman Rostow(C.F.R.), Senator J. William Fulbright("formerly" C.F.R.), Harlen Cleveland(C.F.R.), Nicholas Katzenbach, andSenator Frank Church (C.F.R.). ReneWormser, who served as counsel for theReece Committee, points out in his book,Foundations: Their Power And Influence,that:

At least one foreign foundation(the Rhodes Scholarship Fund) hashad a strong influence on ourforeign policy.... [it] has gainedgreat influence in the United Statesfor British [Fabian] ideas. It hasaccomplished this by annuallyselecting a choice group of prom-ising young men for study inEngland. The usually Anglophilealumni of this system are to befound in eminent positions inlegislature, administration andeducation, and in the ranks ofAmerican foundation officials. Theyform a patronage network ofconsiderable importance.

That is very nearly the understatementof the decade.

IIITHE scholarship scheme was not,

however, the most important segment ofCecil Rhodes' commitment to WorldGovernment. His Illuminist-style "secretsociety" also spawned the world's mostinfluential foreign-policy combine —including America's Council on ForeignRelations. Professor Quigley writes of theformalization of Rhodes' "secretsociety":

They [Ruskins's disciples] wereremarkably successful in these aimsbecause England's most sensationaljournalist William T. Stead(1849-1912), an ardent social re-former and imperialist, broughtthem into association with Rhodes.This association was formally estab-lished on February 5, 1891, whenRhodes and Stead organized asecret society of which Rhodes hadbeen dreaming for sixteen years. Inthis secret society Rhodes was to beleader; Stead, Brett (Lord Esher),and (Alfred) Milner were to forman executive committee; Arthur(Lord) Balfour, (Sir) Harry John-ston, Lord Rothschild, Albert(Lord) Grey, and others were listedas potential members of a "Circleof Initiates"; while there was to bean outer circle known as the "Asso-ciation of Helpers " (later organizedby Milner as the Round Tableorganization).

Notice that the secret society was orga-nized on the Illumunist pattern of"circles within circles," used in Bavariaand France by Weishaupt; and that theRound Table group, which was later tospawn the Council on Foreign Relations,was not part of the inner circle.

Professor Carroll Quigley continues asfollows:

Thus the central part of thesecret society was established byMarch 1891. It continued to func-tion as a formal group, although theouter circle was, apparently, notorganized until 1901-1913. Thisgroup was able to get access toRhodes' money after his death in1902 and also to the fund of loyalRhodes supporters like Alfred Belt[a German financer from Frank-furt, and partner of Rhodes ](1853-1906) and Sir Abe Bailey(1864-1940).

Later, financing was to come from theAstor family and, according to Quigley:

Since 1925 there have been sub-stantial contributions from wealthyindividuals and from foundationsand firms associated with the inter-national banking fraternity, espe-cially the [Andrew] CarnegieUnited Kingdom Trust, and otherorganizations associated with J.P.Morgan, the Rockefeller and Whit-ney families and the associates ofLazard Brothers and of Morgan,Grenfell and Company.

The chief backbone of this or-ganization grew up along the al-ready existing financial cooperationrunning from the Morgan Bank inNew York to a group of interna-tional financiers in London led byLazard Brothers.

Why would international bankers andfinanciers be interested in promoting asocialist World Government? Clearly,socialism is only the bait to obtain thesupport of the political underworld andto create the structure necessary to main-tain dictatorial control. What this smallgroup of financiers and cartel-orientedbusinessmen are interested in is monopo-ly control over the world's natural re-sources, trade, transportation, and com-munications — something that despitetheir great wealth they could not achieveotherwise. Therefore, the super-capitalistsbecome super-socialists, realizing thatonly a World Government under theircontrol can give them the power neces-sary to achieve their goal. Only this couldexplain why these extremely wealthymen would be willing to support move-ments which seem to be aimed at theirown destruction.* The financiers andcartelists do not expect to be injured bythe socialists so long as they can manipu-late them, using them for their ownpurposes. Professor Quigley confirmsthis:

There does exist, and has existedfor a generation, an international... network which operates, to

some extent, in the way the radicalRight believes the Communists act.In fact, this network, which wemay identify as the Round TableGroups, has no aversion to coop-erating with the Communists, orany other groups, and frequentlydoes so. [Emphasis added.]

This clearly suggests that the directors ofthe networkf are convinced that theyhave little to fear from the Communists;that, in fact, they maintain some form ordegree of inside control over the Com-munists.

To the Insiders of the Round Table,World Government is a Messianic cause.As Lionel Curtis, a member of the RoundTable, phrased it: Through world federal-ism "the Kingdom of God could beestablished on earth." According to his*Let me emphasize here that the matter of themachinations of international financiers is anarea in which misinformation abounds. There ismuch literature in the field which containsdubious or totally false data and simply idioticeconomic theory. Many authors writing in thisarea have drawn vast conclusions on the mostdoubtful sort of "evidence." We recommendthat readers venturing into this field maintain ahealthy skepticism concerning any work whichdoes not cite thoroughly reputable sources (andthat even then care be taken against contextualfraud). This is a field from which those seekingto become students of the Communist Conspir-acy can find themselves rocketed hopelessly intoorbit - for all practical purposes effectively re-moved from the struggle against the Communists.fQuigley's attitude toward this conspiracy andhis sources of information are revealed in thefollowing statement: "I know of the operationsof this network because I have studied it fortwenty years and was permitted for two years,in the early 1960's, to examine its papers andsecret records. I have no aversion to it or tomost of its aims and have, for much of my life,been close to it and to many of its instruments.I have objected, both in the past and recently,to a few of its policies . . . . but in general mychief difference of opinion is that it wishes toremain unknown, and I believe its role inhistory is significant enough to be known.

8

obituary written for his fellow membersof the Round Table, Lord Lothian (whoended his career as Ambassador to theUnited States) "held that men shouldstrive to build the Kingdom of Heavenhere upon this earth, and that the leader-ship in that task must fall first andforemost upon the English-speakingpeoples."

Leaders of this group of would-be godshave been, according to Quigley:

(Alfred) Milner, until his death in1925, followed by Curtis(1872-1955), Robert H. (Lord)Brand (brother-in-law of LadyAstor) until his death in 1963, andnow Adam Massic, son of Sir Wil-liam and Brand's successor as man-aging director of Lazard Brothersbank.

Professor Quigley maintains that thepower and influence of the Rhodes-Milner group since 1889, "although notwidely recognized, can hardly be exagger-ated." For example, the Round TableGroup controlled the London Times andnumerous other newspapers and periodi-cals on six continents, and also influencedliterally hundreds of university faculties.Quigley discloses:

From 1884 to about 1915 mem-bers of this group worked valiantlyto extend the empire and to orga-nize it into a federal system Theywere constantly harping on thelessons to be learned from the[British] failure of the AmericanRevolution and the success of theCanadian federation of 1867, andhoped to federate the various partsof the empire as seemed feasible,then confederate the whole of it,with the United Kingdom, into asingle organization. They alsohoped to bring the United Statesinto this organization to whateverdegree was possible.

Stead was able to get Rhodes toaccept, in principle, a solutionwhich might have made Washingtonthe capital of the whole organiza-tion or allow parts of the empire tobecome states of the AmericanUnion.

A loosely organized corps of theRound Table conspirators was thusformed in the United States prior toWorld War I. The chief personalities wereGeorge Beer, Walter Lippmann, FrankAydelotte, Whitney Shepardson, ThomasLamont, Jerome Greene, and Erwin Can-ham. This group's activities were Coordi-nated with those of similar groupsthroughout the British Empire byfrequent visits and discussions, and by a"totally anonymous quarterly magazine,The Round Table."

It was in the aftermath of World War I,however, that the Round Table conspir-acy made its move for power and influ-ence in America. According to ProfessorQuigley:

At the end of the war of 1914, itbecame clear that the organizationof this system [the Round TableGroup] had to be greatly extended.Once again the task was entrustedto Lionel Curtis who established, inEngland and each dominion, a frontorganization to the existing RoundTable Group. This front organiza-tion, called the Royal Institute ofInternational Affairs, had as itsnucleus in each area the existingsubmerged Round Table Group. InNew York it was known as theCouncil on Foreign Relations, andwas a front for J.P. Morgan andCompany in association with thevery small American Round TableGroup.

The American organizers weredominated by the large number ofMorgan "experts," includingLamont and Beer, who had gone to

the Paris Peace Conference andthere became close friends with thesimilar group of English "experts"which had been recruited by theMilner group. In fact, the originalplans for the Royal Institute ofInternational Affairs and the Coun-cil on Foreign Relations weredrawn up at Paris. The Council ofRIIA (which, by Curtis' energycame to be housed in ChathamHouse, across St. James's Squarefrom the Astors, and was soonknown by the name of this head-quarters) and the board of theCouncil on Foreign Relations havecarried ever since the marks of theirorigin.

Although Professor Quigley's informa-tion is extremely revealing, it is amazingto note that he has very carefully omittedthe name of one of the stars of thefounding of the C.F.R. — the mysterious"Colonel" Edward Mandell House. Thiscould hardly have been a mere oversight.For whatever reason, Professor Quigleythought House best left out of his discus-sions. Joseph Kraft (C.F.R.), however,tells us in Harper's that the chief agent inthe formal founding of the C.F.R. wasColonel House, supported by such of hisproteges as Walter Lippmann (C.F.R.),John Foster Dulles (C.F.R.), Allen Dulles(C.F.R.), and Christian Herter (C.F.R.). Itwas House who acted as host for theRound Table Group, both English andAmerican, at the key meeting of May 19,1919, in the Majestic Hotel, Paris, whichcommitted the conspiracy to creation ofthe C.F.R.

The conspirators had hoped to estab-lish a World Government under theLeague of Nations, as an outgrowth ofWorld War I. But, while President Wood-row Wilson and House (the man he calledhis "alter ego") were doing their best torestructure the world at Versailles, theether of internationalist propaganda wasrapidly wearing off back home. As the

negotiations revealed that one side hadbeen about as guilty as the other, and allthe glitter of the "moral crusade" evapo-rated with Wilson's vaunted "FourteenPoints," the "rubes back on Main Street"began to stir and awaken. Reaction anddisillusionment set in.

Americans hardly wanted to get into aWorld Government with double-dealingEuropean crooks whose specialty wassecret treaty hidden behind secret treaty.The guest of honor, so to speak, stalkedout of the banquet before the poisonedmeal could be served. And, withoutAmerican inclusion, there could be nomeaningful World Government.

Aroused public opinion made it obvi-ous that the U.S. Senate dared not ratifya treaty saddling the country with suchan internationalist commitment. TheAmerican public had to somehow be soldthe idea of internationalism and WorldGovernment, and the C.F.R. was made toorder for precisely that purpose. Again,the key was Colonel House.

IVTHE significance of the hands of

House in the construction of the Councilon Foreign Relations can only be under-stood against his background as an agentfor the Insiders. House, whose father wasa representative in the American Southfor English financial interests, was Texas-born but educated in England. He was along-time intriguer in Democrat politicsand had been instrumental in electingseveral Governors of Texas (one of whomgave him the honorary title of "Colo-nel"). His move into national politicscame with his early backing of WoodrowWilson, who regarded him as his politicalmentor* and relied heavily upon him.

The "Colonel" was strictly a behind-the-scenes operator who never had anyofficial capacity, but who gained intensesatisfaction as a master of the marionettes*House was described by a friend of twenty-five years' standing as "highly radical, morethan liberal, in the political-social sense."

10

who occupied the center stage. His per-sonal political philosophy was detailed ina prophetic novel entitled Philip Dru:Administrator, published by B.W.Huebsch, a favorite of the Left and formany years a prominent Fabian. Thebook was so loaded with political dyna-mite that no author was listed; but, inprivate letters to friends, House admittedauthorship.*

In Philip Dru, Edward House laid out athinly fictionalized plan for conquest ofAmerica. He described a "conspiracy" -the word is his — which succeeds inelecting a U.S. President by means of"deception regarding his real opinionsand intentions."† Among other things,wrote the C.F.R. "founder," the conspir-acy was to insinuate "itself into theprimaries, in order that no candidatemight be nominated whose views werenot in accord with theirs." Elections wereto become mere charades conducted forthe bedazzlement of the booboisie. Theidea was to use both the Democrat andRepublican Parties as instruments topromote World Government.

House's outline for conspiracy is givenexcellent analysis by his fawning biogra-pher, Professor Charles Seymour(C.F.R.). Professor Seymour states in TheIntimate Papers Of Colonel House:

The extent of Colonel House'sinfluence upon the legislative plansof the [Wilson] Administrationmay be gathered from a remarkabledocument which deserves someattention. In the autumn of 1912,immediately after the presidentialelection, there was published anovel, or political romance, entitled"Philip Dru: Administrator. "It wasthe story of a young West Pointgraduate. .. who was caught by thespirit of revolt against the tyrannyof privileged interests.

A stupid and reactionary Govern-ment at Washington provokesarmed rebellion, in which Dru joins

whole-heartedly and which he ulti-mately leads to complete success.He himself becomes dictator andproceeds by ordinance to remakethe mechanism of government, toreform the basic laws that deter-mine the relation of the classes... and to bring about an interna-tional grouping or league of powersfounded upon Anglo-Saxon solidar-ity. His reforms accomplished, hegives effect once more to repre-sentative institutions as formulatedin a new American Constitution,better fitted than the old for thespirit and conditions of the twenti-eth century. [Emphasis added.]

Much that House outlined in PhilipDru became reality during the WilsonAdministration. "All that book has saidshould be, comes about," wrote Wilson'sSecretary of the Interior Franklin K.Lane. "The President comes to Philip Dru[House] in the end."

In Philip Dru, Edward House wrote ofestablishing "Socialism as dreamed byKarl Marx." A major step towards achiev-ing this was taken with the passage of thegraduated income tax, a plank in theCommunist Manifesto the realization ofwhich House called for in Philip Dru. Ofcourse, House's patrons, who helped pushthe graduated income tax, deftly side-stepped its effects by placing major por-

*Edited by Charles Seymour, The IntimatePapers Of Colonel House, Houghton MifflinCompany, Boston, 1926, Pp. 152-159.

† Although partially thwarted by the loss of

Wilson to illness, House succeeded in 1932 withF.D.R., who went straight from the Chicagoconvention to huddle with the "Colonel" at thelatter's Massachusetts home. In 1938, Housetold his biographer Charles Seymour: "Duringthe last fifteen years I have been close to thecenter of things, although few people suspect it.No important foreigner has come to Americawithout talking to me. I was close to themovement that nominated Roosevelt . . . . Hehas given me free hand in advising [Secretary ofState Cordell] Hull. All the Ambassadors havereported to me frequently."

11

tions of their own fortunes under theumbrella of tax-free foundations. (Theidea, remember, is to destroy the middleclass, not the wealthy.)

House also served the Insiders by act-ing as what Professor Seymour calls the"unseen guardian angel" of the FederalReserve Act. In his book, "Colonel"House had Dru decree just such a newbanking law providing "a flexible [paper]currency." Again, placing the control ofmoney and all credit in the hand of theState was another plank from the Com-munist Manifesto. The Intimate Papers OfColonel House reveals that the "Colonel"was working hand in glove with certainWall Street Insiders to promote the Fed-eral Reserve Act under the guise of itsbeing a move towards "democracy."Biographer George Viereck assures us that"The Schiffs [C.F.R.], the Warburgs[C.F.R.], the Kahns [C.F.R.], the Rock-efellers [C.F.R.], and the Morgans[C.F.R.] put their faith in House

Many patriotic bankers, of course,opposed the Federal Reserve and othersocialist legislation imposed on Americaby the Wilson-House regime, but conspir-ators are interested in control and, in theend, control resides in the power toexpand government. He who controls thereins of government controls the people.Control the government of the world, andyou control the people of the world.Much of the control over the people ofAmerica was originally engineered byColonel House — who, by the time heacted as mid-wife at the birth of theC.F.R. in Paris, was an experienced andsuccessful front man for the Insiders.

The C.F.R., as we have seen, was thebrain-child of the Round Table conspir-acy, acting with and through ColonelHouse. Its purpose was to promote theconcepts of internationalism and WorldGovernment. This was to be accom-plished largely by infiltration of thegovernment and both political Parties a laPhilip Dru. You will recall it was House'splan to manipulate this "conspiracy" in

such a way that opposing candidateswould only seem to have differences; and,you may have noticed, today nationalcandidates argue only over providing"new leadership" — not new policies. Themove toward World Government has thusnever so much as slowed. Key to thisconspiracy in America has been theRound Table's Council on Foreign Rela-tions.

THE C.F.R.'s Twenty-Fifth AnnualReport tells us this of the C.F.R.'s found-ing at Paris:

. .. The Institue of InternationalAffairs founded at Paris in 1919"was comprised at the outset of twobranches, one in the United King-dom and one in the U.S. .. .

Later the plan was changed to create anostensible autonomy because, "... itseemed unwise to set up a single institutewith branches." It had to be made toappear that the C.F.R. in America, andthe R.I.I.A. in Britain, were really inde-pendent bodies, lest the American publicbecome aware that the C.F.R. was in facta subsidiary of the Round Table Groupand react in patriotic fury.

Professor Quigley provides a run-downon who was who in the C.F.R. when itwas finally incorporated in 1921:

The New York branch [of theRoyal Institute of InternationalAffairs, i.e. the Council on ForeignRelations] was dominated by theassociates of the Morgan Bank. Forexample, in 1928 the Council onForeign Relations had John W.Davis as president, Paul Cravath asvice-president, and a council ofthirteen others, which includedOwen D. Young, Russell C. Lefflng-well, Norman Doris, Allen Dulles,George W. Wickersham, Frank P.Polk, Whitney Shepardson, Isaiah

12

Bowman, Stephen Duggan, andOtto Kahn [all of whom werepartners, associates, or employeesof Morgan interests] . . . .

The academic figures have beenthose linked to Morgan, such asJames T. Shotwell, Charles Sey-mour [House's biographer], JosephChamberlain, Philip Jessup and,more recently, Philip Moseley,Grayson Kirk and Henry M. Wris-ton . . . .

Closely allied with this Morganinfluence were a small group ofWall Street law firms, whose chieffigures were Elihu Root, John W.Davis, Paul D. Cravath, RussellLeffingwell, the Dulles brothersand, more recently, Arthur H.Dean, Philip D. Reed, and John J.McCloy.

According to Quigley, the most impor-tant financial dynasties in America duringthe Twenties were (in addition to Mor-gan) the Rockefeller family; Kuhn, Loeband Company; Dillon Read and Com-pany; and Brown Bros. Harriman. Allwere well represented in the C.F.R., andby such luminaries as Otto Kahn, JacobSchiff (financier of Leon Trotsky and theRussian Revolution), Paul Warburg(Schiff s partner, architect of the FederalReserve Act, and brother of Max Warburgwho financed the Russian Revolutionfrom Germany), William Averell Harri-man, Albert H. Wiggin, Frank Vanderlip,and Herbert H. Lehman. In addition, thecharter membership of the C.F.R. wascomprised of 150 members of ColonelHouse's select Task Force for planningthe Peace Treaty, plus one of the found-ers of the Intercollegiate Socialist Societynamed Walter Lippmann.

During the "return to normalcy" ofthe Twenties, the C.F.R. remained rela-tively quiet. In 1929, it acquired itsheadquarters property, the Harold PrattHouse at 58 East 68th Street in NewYork, as a gift from the Rockefellers.

Through the years the Rockefeller clanhas continued to support the C.F.R. withgenerous grants from their tax-free foun-dations.

Much of the Council's financing hascome also from the various Carnegiefoundations. There is, in fact, a great dealto indicate that Andrew Carnegie wasneck-deep in the Rhodes conspiracy. Thetwo were very close friends and Carnegie,who made millions in America yet neverbecame an American citizen, dreamedlike Rhodes of the re-uniting of Englandand America. The Reece Committee, inits investigation of the foundations, dis-covered that the Carnegie Endowment forInternational Peace began propagandaactivities for U.S. involvement in a Euro-pean war several years before World War Ibegan. The conspirators of the CarnegieEndowment for International Peace wereconvinced that the best way to establish"world peace" was through a "worldwar," which would lead to World Govern-ment. The various Carnegie foundationswere, and still are, heavily represented inthe C.F.R. membership.

As World War II approached, theRound Table Group was influential inseeing that Hitler was not stopped inAustria, the Rhineland, or Sudentenland— and thereby was largely responsible forprecipitating the holocaust. A secondworld war would greatly enhance theopportunity for establishment of WorldGovernment.

With the Round Table doing its workin Europe, the C.F.R. carried the ball inthe United States. The Council's first taskwas to infiltrate and develop effectivecontrol of the U.S. State Department -to make certain that after World War IIthere would be no slip-ups as there hadbeen following World War I. The story ofthe C.F.R. takeover of the U.S. Depart-ment of State is contained in StateDepartment Publication 2349, Report ToThe President On The Results Of The SanFrancisco Conference. It is the report ofSecretary of State Edward R. Stettinius

13

(C.F.R.) to President Harry Truman. Onpage twenty we find:

With the outbreak of war inEurope it was clear that the UnitedStates would be confronted, afterthe war, with new and exceptionalproblems... .Accordingly, a Com-mittee on Post-War Problems wasset up before the end of 1939 [twoyears before the U.S. entered thewar], at the suggestion of the CFR.The Committee consisted of highofficials of the Department of State[all but one of whom were C.F.R.members]. It was assisted by aresearch staff [provided by, fi-nanced by, and directed by theC.F.R.], which in February, 1941,was organized into a Division ofSpecial Research [and went off theC.F.R. payroll and on to that of theState Department].

[After Pearl Harbor] the re-search facilities were rapidly ex-panded, and the DepartmentalCommittee on Post-War Problemswas reorganized into an AdvisoryCommittee on Post-War ForeignPolicies [completely staffed by theC.F.R.] .*

This is the group which designed theUnited Nations — the first major success-ful step on the road to a World Super-state. Members of the C.F.R. group in-cluded Harold Stassen, John J. McCloy,Owen Lattimore ("conscious, articulate*The fact that a powerful C.F.R. contingentwas moved into the State Department in 1939is verified in the C.F.R.'s booklet, A Record OfTwenty Years, 1921-1947, which says of thefinancing for the takeover: "The program heredescribed was largely financed by generous an-nual renewals of the initial grant of funds bythe Rockefeller Foundation late in 1939. In ad-dition, an annual grant of the Carnegie Corpora-tion contributed to the success of the work."tC.F.R.Secretaries of State include Henry Stim-son, Edward Stettinius, George Marshall, DeanAcheson, John Foster Dulles, Christian Herter,and Dean Rusk.

instrument of the Soviet internationalconspiracy"), Alger Hiss (Communistspy), Philip Jessup, Harry Dexter White(Communist spy), Nelson Rockefeller,John Foster Dulles, John Carter Vincent(security risk), and Dean Acheson. Forty-seven C.F.R. members were among theAmerican delegates to the founding ofthe U.N. in San Francisco in 1945.

Not only did members of the Councilon Foreign Relations dominate the estab-lishment of the U.N., but C.F.R. mem-bers were at the elbow of the AmericanPresident at Teheran, Potsdam, and Yalta— where hundreds of millions of humanbeings were delivered into the hands ofJosef Stalin, vastly extending the powerof the International Communist Conspir-acy. Administrative Assistant to the Presi-dent of the United States during this timewas a key member of the C.F.R. namedLauchlin Currie — subsequently identifiedby J. Edgar Hoover as a Soviet agent, andC.F.R.-I.P.R. liaison to the President.

So completely has the C.F.R. domi-nated the State Department over the pastthirty-eight years that every Secretary ofState † except Cordell Hull, James Byrnes,and William Rogers has been a member ofthe Council on Foreign Relations. WhileRogers is not C.F.R., Professor HenryKissinger, the President's chief foreignpolicy advisor, came to the job from thestaff of the Council on Foreign Relations.It will be interesting to watch as Kissing-er, not Rogers, runs America's foreignpolicy.

Having ensured that Eastern Europewould fall into the hands of the Commu-nists, the C.F.R. helped to arrange thesell-out of China to the Communists. Thepropaganda which convinced Americansthat Mao Tse-tung was an innocent agrar-ian reformer running an Asian branch ofthe A.D.A. emanated from a C.F.R. frontknown as the Institute of Pacific Rela-tions. Professor Quigley reveals:

After 1925, a somewhat similarstructure of organizations, known

14

as the Institute of Pacific Relations,was set up in twelve countries. .. on an interlocking basis, withthe Round Table Group and theRoyal Institute of InternationalAffairs.

The Senate Internal Security Subcommit-tee, which investigated the Americanbranch, concluded:

The Institute of Pacific Relations(IPR) has been considered by theAmerican Communist Party and bySoviet officials as an instrument ofCommunist policy, propaganda,and military intelligence.

The IPR disseminated and soughtto popularize false informationoriginating from Soviet and Com-munist sources.

Members of the small core ofofficials and staff members whocontrolled IPR were either Commu-nist or pro-Communist.

The IPR was a vehicle used bythe Communists to orientate Amer-ican far eastern policies towardCommunist objectives.

Quigley, whom you will keep in mindis biased in favor of the Round Tableconspiracy, states:

The influence of the Communistsin IPR is well established, but thepatronage of Wall Street is less wellknown.

. .. The headquarters of the IPRand of the American Council ofIPR were both in New York andwere closely associated on an inter-locking basis. Each spent about$2.5 million dollars over thequarter-century from 1925 to1950, of which about half, in eachcase, came from the Carnegie Foun-dation and the Rockefeller Foun-dation (which were themselves in-terlocking groups controlled by an

alliance of Morgan and Rockefellerinterests in Wall Street). Much ofthe rest, especially of the AmericanCouncil, came from firms closelyallied to these two Wall Streetinterests, such as Standard Oil, In-ternational Telephone and Tele-graph, International General Elec-tric, the National City Bank, andthe Chase National Bank.

Since the English and American RoundTable groups were financed by men whohad extensive holdings in China, whywould they not be doing everything intheir power to make certain that Chinadid not fall to the Communists? This iswhat Alfred Kohlberg, a patriotic Ameri-can who had investments in China, couldnot understand. Kohlberg was an I.P.R.member who, when he discovered itsCommunist domination, tried to fight theRockefeller and Carnegie interests andexpose the I.P.R. Through his efforts theInstitute of Pacific Relations was ex-posed, by the McCarran Committee ofthe U.S. Senate - though the role of the

15

C.F.R. was kept out of the scandal. Thefact of the matter is that the CommunistI.P.R. was run by such C.F.R. stalwarts asOwen Lattimore (the "conscious, articu-late instrument of the Soviet conspir-acy"), Soviophile Philip Jessup, DeanRusk, Communist spies Alger Hiss andLauchlin Currie, and other such C.F.R.notables.*

VIWHENEVER one points to the strange

affinity between a coterie of financecapitalists and Communism, one istreated as if he is a candidate for thefunny farm. In spite of all the evidence inhis own book, Professor Quigley, whodescribes the Eastern Establishment as"internationalist, astonishingly liberal,"and admits the group "has no aversion tocooperating with the Communists,"laughs at the idea that the two are linked.He does, however, admit:

. . . the relationship between thefinancial circles of London andthose of the eastern United States. . . reflects one of the most power-ful influences in twentieth-centuryAmerican and world history. Thetwo ends of this English-speakingaxis have sometimes been catted,perhaps facetiously, the English andAmerican Establishments. There is,however, a considerable degree oftruth to the joke, a truth whichreflects a very real power structure.It is this power structure which theRadical Right in the United Stateshas been attacking for years in thebelief that they are attacking theCommunists. This is particularlytrue when these attacks are direct-

*It is less than coincidence that the Council onForeign Relations now advocates recognition ofRed China "to pull China back into the familyof nations." (See Richard Nixon's "Asia AfterVietnam" in the October 1967 issue of theCouncil on Foreign Relations' official maga-zine, Foreign Affairs.)

ed, as they so frequently are, at"Harvard socialism," or at "Left-wing newspapers" like the NewYork Times and the WashingtonPost, or at foundations.

After describing how cosmopolitan andsophisticated these people are, the Profes-sor actually tries to rationalize Commu-nist activity in this Establishment conspir-acy as a product of naivete. Quigleywrites:

It was this group of people,whose wealth and influence so ex-ceeded their experience and under-standing [sic], who provided muchof the frame-work of influencewhich the Communist sympathizersand fellow travelers took over inthe United States in the 1930's. Itmust be recognized that the powerthat these energetic Left-wingersexercised was never their ownpower or Communist power butwas ultimately the power of theinternational financial coterie, and,once the anger and suspicions ofthe American people were aroused,as they were by 1950, it was afairly simple matter to get rid ofthe Red sympathizers. [Emphasisadded.]

This, of course, raises the question ofjust who is using whom? It is alwaysassumed that it is the Communists whodupe others into doing their work. Inmost cases this is undoubtedly true;however, it strains credulity to believethat men who are the world's best busi-nessmen and bankers, on the one hand,can be perennial pigeons in dealing withCommunists on the other. Clearly thereare Insiders manipulating both ends ofthe show.

The Reece Committee attempted toinvestigate this matter. Norman Dodd,chief investigator for the Committee, wastold by the then-President of the Ford

16

Foundation that the purpose of his Foun-dation "was to so alter American societythat it could be comfortably merged withmost of the Soviet Union." Dodd wasthen told that this was being done on"orders from the White House." Quigleysays of the Reece Committee's investiga-tion of tax-exempt foundations:

It soon became clear that peopleof immense wealth would be un-happy if the investigation went toofar and that the "most respected"newspapers in the country, closelyallied with these men of wealth,would not get excited enoughabout any revelations to make thepublicity worth while, in terms ofvotes or campaign contributions.An interesting report showing theLeft-wing associations of the inter-locking nexus of tax-exempt foun-dations was issued in 1954 ratherquietly.

Dodd maintains that when the investi-gation began probing into "the so-calledlegitimate world" which is the real nervecenter of the Communist movement, theinvestigation was quashed. Rene Worm-ser, counsel for the Reece Committee,states in his book Foundations: TheirPower And Influence: "Mr. [Congress-man Wayne] Hays [an Ohio Democratwho while serving on the Reece Commit-tee did everything possible to preventorderly and coherent Hearings] told usone day that 'the White House' had beenin touch with him and asked him if hewould cooperate to kill the Committee."The man in the White House at that timewas Dwight Eisenhower — a member ofthe C.F.R. who named six members ofthe C.F.R. to his Cabinet, as well asnaming no less that twelve members ofthe C.F.R. to the rank of Under Secre-tary.

The answer to the question of who isusing whom is at least partially answeredby Professor Quigley, who reveals the

following amazing information aboutC.F.R.-Morgan manipulation of the Left:

More than fifty years ago theMorgan firm decided to infiltratethe Left-wing political movementsin the United States. This wasrelatively easy to do, since thesegroups were starved for funds andeager for a voice to reach thepeople. Wall Street supplied both.The purpose was not to destroy,dominate or take over but wasreally threefold: (1) to keep in-formed about the thinking of Left-wing or liberal groups; (2) to pro-vide them with a mouthpiece sothat they could "blow off steam,"and (3) to have a final veto ontheir publicity, and possibly ontheir actions, if they ever went"radical"

What is more likely is that these WallStreeters financed the Left because it waspromoting the world Superstate soughtby the Round Table Group. After all,despite the erroneous publicity about"wealthy Rightwing millionaires," therehas been no corresponding financing ofConstitutional Conservatives by theseelements.

Quigley cites the alliance between WallStreet and the Left in creating NewRepublic magazine, which was organizedby a Morgan associate and financed by anheiress to the Standard Oil trust. Hewrites:

The original purpose for estab-lishing the paper was to provide anoutlet for the progressive Left andto guide it quietly in an Anglophiledirection. This latter task was en-trusted to a young man, only fouryears out of Harvard [where hehelped found the IntercollegiateSocialist Society], but already amember of the mysterious RoundTable Group, which has played a

17

major role in directing England'sforeign policy since its formalestablishment in 1901.

The young man was Walter Lippmann,described by Carroll Quigley as the au-thentic voice of the Eastern Establish-ment.

The New Republic was founded byMorgan agent Willard Straight. HerbertCroly, the first Editor of the magazineand a naive "Liberal" who accidentallystumbled into seventy-two officially citedCommunist Fronts or activities, makesperfectly clear in his official biography ofStraight that the latter "was in no sense aliberal or a progressive, but was, indeed, atypical international banker and that theNew Republic was simply a medium foradvancing certain designs of such interna-tional bankers, notably to blunt theisolationism and anti-British senti-ments . . . ."*

Reader's Digest Senior Editor EugeneLyons, in his book The Red Decade,extensively chronicles the services donefor Soviet Russia by the Insider-con-trolled New Republic. Lyons writes:

The American liberal aberrationhad its house organ, "The NewRepublic," which led all the rest inavid and undiscriminating accep-tance of the myth of Stalin'sUtopia.

What did serving as Stalin's press agenthave to do with "advancing certain de-signs of such international bankers?"What indeed, unless it is promoting theinterests of the C.F.R.'s goal of WorldGovernment?t

The Round Table Group, using Morganmoney, has at the same time used both ofour political Parties and the Communistsfor its own purposes. Quigley reveals:

The associations between WallStreet and the Left.. . are reallysurvivals of the associations be-

tween the Morgan Bank and theLeft. To Morgan all political partieswere simply organizations to beused, and the firm always wascareful to keep a foot in all camps.Morgan himself, Dwight Morrow(C.F.R.), and other partners wereallied with Republicans; Russell C.Leffingwell (C.F.R.) was allied withthe Democrats.. . and Thomas W.Lamont (C.F.R.) was allied withthe Left.

According to Quigley the Lamont fam-ily was the "chief link" between WallStreet and the Communists — althoughThomas Lamont, Morgan's partner, wasactive in Republican Presidential politics.As Phyllis Schlafly noted in A Choice NotAn Echo, "Among the most influentialkingmakers who profess to be Republi-cans is the Morgan banking group headedby Thomas S. Lamont Jr., son of the

*Straight subsequently launched the magazineUnited Nations World.

†The New Republic has been enormously influ-

ential among American "Liberals" who do notrealize they are tools being used for ulteriorpurposes. William F. Buckley Jr. says he beganNational Review to serve as a Rightwing NewRepublic, but has succeeded only in producingthe world's most effective cure for insomniawhile attacking anti-Communist activists. Infact, the editors of New Republic and NationalReview have arranged a deal whereby one maynow receive both magazines at the same timefor a reduced package rate.

Mr. Buckley, whose TV program is carriedover C.F.R.-controlled stations, and whosecolumn appears in such C.F.R. organs as theNew York Post (owned by Jacob Schiffsgranddaughter, Dorothy), never mentions theC.F.R. In his syndicated column shortly afterthe election of Richard Nixon, Buckley went sofar as to give his seal of approval to theappointment of Nelson Rockefeller (C.F.R.) asSecretary of State — calling the man who alongwith partner Cyrus Eaton controls Americantrade with the Red bloc, an "anti-Communist."Mr. Buckley pretends the enemy is simply"Liberal" philosophy and ideology. He hasbecome the Liberal Establishment's "houseconservative," a "respectable and responsible"adversary, — one who never ever whispers aboutconspiracy.

18

Thomas S. Lament who mastermindedWillkie's nomination . .. . " The Lamentswere also avid supporters of Eisenhower,and helped finance Saturday Review andtheTVew York Post.

Quigley states that the chief evidenceagainst the Lamonts "can be found in thefiles of HUAC which show Tom Lamont,his wife Flora, and his son Corliss assponsors and financial angels to almost ascore of extreme Left organizations in-cluding the Communist Party itself. . . .During this whole period of over twodecades, Corliss Lamont, with the fullsupport of his parents, was one of thechief figures in 'fellow traveler' circlesand one of the chief spokesmen for theSoviet point of view . .. . "

Corliss Lamont, a member ofC.F.R.-related groups such as the Ameri-can Association for the United Nationsand the Foreign Policy Association, wasnamed by the House Special Committeeon Un-American Activities as "probablythe most persistent propagandist for theSoviet Union to be found anywhere inthe United States."

In The Bolshevik Invasion Of TheWest, Louis Budenz, former Editor of theCommunist Daily Worker, turned anti-Communist, writes of the current state ofthis Wall Street-Moscow axis and makesthe following observation:

It is the Communists in theUnited States themselves who con-tinue to attest to the progress ofthe Soviet line, reporting contin-uously improvement of relationswith the Rockefeller-Morgan inter-ests in Wall Street. Right in themidst of the war in Southeast Asiawe are informed that these financialgiants push forward their programof help to the Soviet dictatorship.

The Worker of July 11, 1965, comesforward with this touching tribute to theHouse of Morgan's affection for theSino-Soviet cause:

The ironical result is that bigbusinessmen are generally moreprogressive than big labor leaders. Itis Thomas Gates (C.F.R.), chairmanof the board of Morgan GuarantyTrust Company, who advocates re-consideration of our China policy,not George Meany. It is the U.S.Chamber of Commerce that wouldexplore means of expanding East-West trade, not the AFL-CIO.

The Worker of August 30, 1964, con-tained this statement from ComradeVictor Perlo:

The change in the balance ofworld forces towards socialism andnationalism has impelled the moresensible and knowledgeable of theWall Streeters to move towardslimited accommodations with theU.S.S.R.

Clearly, the Chicago Tribune's editorialon the C.F.R. of December 9, 1950, stillapplies:

The members of the Council [onForeign Relations] are persons ofmore than average influence in thecommunity. They have used theprestige that their wealth, theirsocial position, and their educationhave given them to lead their coun-try toward bankruptcy and militarydebacle. They should look at theirhands. There is blood on them -the dried blood of the last war andthe fresh blood of the present one[the Korean War].

It goes without saying that the C.F.R.'shands are now bloody also with the goreof 150,000 Americans in Vietnam, as theCouncil has succeeded in promoting asAmerican policy the shipment of Ameri-can aid and trade to the East Europeanarsenal of the Vietcong killing our sons inthe field.

19

VIITODAY the C.F.R. remains active in

working towards its final goal of a govern-ment of all the world - a governmentwhich the Insiders and their allies willcontrol. And, they don't even try to hideit. Study No. 7, published by the C.F.R.on November 25, 1959, openly advocates"building a new international order[which] must be responsive to worldaspirations for peace, [and] for social andeconomic change... an internationalorder. .. including states labeling them-selves as 'Socialist' [Communist]." Toaccomplish this the C.F.R. says we must"gradually increase the authority of theU.N." As part of this effort, the Councilon Foreign Relations advocates secretnegotiations with the Communists as partof "disarmament":

The U.S. should explore Sovietproposals for complete or partialdisarmament.... Efforts to resolvepolitical conflicts with Communistpowers should occur simultaneous-ly with, not prior to, disarmamentnegotiation. Negotiate on theseproblems perhaps directly with theU.S.S.R. in secret. .. .

President Kennedy responded by appoint-ing the Chairman of the Board of C.F.R.,John J. McCloy — formerly of the Rocke-feller Chase Manhattan Bank — to headthe U.S. Disarmament Agency.

The C.F.R. in Study No. 7 also advo-cates a "more ambitious, longer term,"foreign-aid program which would "avoidmaking aid contingent upon politicalcommitments to the West." In addition,it recommends recognition of Red Chinaand greatly expanded trade with theCommunists supplying the Vietcong.

An endless interlock is maintained bythe C.F.R. with the major foundations,the Foreign Policy Association, WorldAffairs Council, the Committee for Eco-nomic Development, Business AdvisoryCouncil, Institute for American Strategy,

Commission on National Goals, AmericanAssembly, National Planning Association,and Americans for Democratic Action.On the international level, the C.F.R. isheavily interlocked with the Bilderber-gers, the English-Speaking Union, thePilgrims Society, and with the parentorganization, the Round Table.

The Council has completely dominatedthe Cabinet and chief advisory posts ofthe Roosevelt, Truman, Eisenhower,Kennedy, and Johnson Administrations.President Nixon, a "former" C.F.R. mem-ber, has appointed or retained the follow-ing members of C.F.R. to high posts inhis Administration: Henry A. Kissinger,Chief Foreign Policy Advisor (a paidmember of the staff of C.F.R.); HenryCabot Lodge, Chief Negotiator in Paris;Charles Yost, Ambassador to the UnitedNations (a paid member of the staff ofC.F.R.); Arthur Burns, Counselor to thePresident; Harlan Cleveland, U.S. Ambas-sador to N.A.T.O.; George Ball, ForeignPolicy Consultant to the State Depart-ment; Robert Murphy, special consultanton international affairs; Richard F. Peder-son, Counselor and Executive Secretaryof the Department of State; Alan Pifer,consultant to the President on educa-tional finance; Dr. Paul McCracken, chiefeconomic aide; Ellsworth Bunker, U.S.Ambassador to Saigon; General AndrewJ. Goodpaster, chief military policyadvisor; Dr. Glenn T. Seaborg, Chairmanof the Atomic Energy Commission;Joseph J. Sisco, Assistant Secretary ofState for the Middle East and South Asia;Jacob Beam, Ambassador to the SovietUnion; and, Gerald Smith, Director ofthe Arms Control and DisarmamentAgency.

Administrations, both Democrat andRepublican, come and go — but theC.F.R. lingers on. This is why the morethings seem to change, the more theyremain the same. The fix is in at thetop, where the same coterie of Insiders,bent on control of the world, runs theshow. • •