Some statistics cannot be understood without being set within a
political framework, because they reflect politics as much as, or more
than, they do reality.
The unemployment rate is an example and a cautionary tale.
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), the seasonally
adjusted official unemployment rate for February fell to a four-year
national low of 7.7%. While the White House cautiously congratulated
itself, Republicans quickly pointed to what is often called the real
unemployment rate; it stood at 14.3%.
The BLS looks at six categories of different data, from U-1 to U-6,
to analyze employment every month. U-3 includes people who have been
unemployed but who have actively looked for work during the past month;
this is the official unemployment rate used by the media. U-6 contains
data excluded from U-3, including part-time workers and the unemployed
who have unsuccessfully looked for a job in the last year; this is the
real unemployment rate.
Those politicians who want to take credit for lower unemployment
thrust U-3 figures forward. Those who wish to deny them credit prefer
U-6.
But matters may be even worse.
Now there is fresh reason to believe that even the 14.3% rate may be a considerable understatement.
The Disabled and the Unemployment Rate
National Public Radio recently published the results of a six-month
investigation by reporter Chana Joffe-Walt: “Unfit for Work: The
Startling Rise of Disability in America.” Joffe-Walt uncovered what she
calls a “disability-industrial complex,” which spends more on disability
payouts than on welfare and food stamps combined.
About a year ago, the New York Post reported that “more than
10.5 million individuals” received disability each month, and that the
reserves will be exhausted in 2018. Joffe-Walt claims the federal
government sends out approximately 14 million payments; Social
Security’s disability fund is expected to run out of reserves by 2016.
On March 22, during an interview with This American Life, we
learned that “since the economy began its slow, slow recovery in late
2009, we’ve been averaging about 150,000 jobs created per month. In that
same period every month, almost 250,000 people have been applying for
disability.”
Why do disability figures skew the unemployment rate? In the NPR
article, Joffe-Walt explains that “the vast majority of people on
federal disability do not work. Yet because they are not technically
part of the labor force, they are not counted among the unemployed.”
They become the invisible unemployed.
What Explains the Rise in Disability Payouts?
The precipitous rise in disability claims comes from the unintended consequences of political maneuvering.
“The End of Welfare as We Know It” was announced in 1996 when
President Clinton signed a reform act intended to move people off
welfare rolls and into jobs. Clinton “encouraged” the individual states
to push for the transition by making them fund a much larger share of
their welfare programs. To encourage the individual recipients, the
reforms also capped the length of time a person was eligible for
welfare.
The incentive worked on the states, but not in the manner intended.
Each person on welfare became a continuing cost for a state, but each
person who moved onto disability saved the state money, because Social
Security disability insurance is fully funded by the federal government.
In her NPR report, Joffe-Walt indicates how aggressively the states shifted welfare recipients onto disability. She writes:
“PCG [Public Consulting Group] is a private company that states pay
to comb their welfare rolls and move as many people as possible onto
disability… The company has an office in eastern Washington state that’s
basically a call center, full of headsetted women in cubicles who make
calls all day long to potentially disabled Americans, trying to help
them discover and document their disabilities.”
A recent contract between PCG and the state of Missouri offered PCG $2,300 per person it shifted from welfare to disability.
The incentive for individuals to leave welfare also worked, but, again, not in the manner intended.
Disability is easier to qualify for than welfare and has no time
limit. Moreover, those on disability qualify for Medicare and other
benefits, as well as receive payments roughly equal to a minimum-wage
job. According to Joffe-Walt, only 1% of those who go onto disability
leave to rejoin the workforce.
Conclusion: What Is the Actual Unemployment Rate?
If neither the official (U-3) nor the real (U-6) unemployment rate
can be trusted, then how can we ascertain a more reliable rate?
A huge step would be to acknowledge the invisible unemployed who are
not part of the current BLS calculations. They include not merely the
so-called “disabled,” but also those who have left the workforce for
other reasons.
CNS News noted of the February 7.7% unemployment rate: “The number of
Americans designated as ‘not in the labor force’ in February was
89,304,000, a record high… according to the Department of Labor.” The
economic trend-monitoring site InvestmentWatch concluded that the actual
American unemployment rate — one that includes all unemployed — is
around 30%. The site reasoned that “89 million not in the labor force =
29%, give or take, assuming the U.S. population is 310,000,000 +
official unemployment 7.7%.”
It is not possible to render an entirely accurate unemployment
picture. For example, the population figure of 310,000,000 used by
InvestmentWatch almost certainly includes people under 16 who cannot
legally work. Thus, the unemployment rate may be higher. On the other
hand, many “not in the labor force” could be retired or otherwise
voluntarily unemployed. Not enough data are available.
It is possible, however, to reject the official unemployment rate.
And it is necessary to cultivate a healthy skepticism of statistics
produced by politics, as so many are.
Sincerely,
Wendy McElroy
Monday, April 29, 2013
Spain Is Beyond Doomed: The 2 Scariest Unemployment Charts Ever
More
(Reuters)
Spain is in a great depression, and it is one of the most terrifying things I have ever seen.
Five years after its housing boom turned to bust, Spanish unemployment hit a record high of 27.2 percent in the first quarter of 2013. It's almost too horrible to comprehend, but 19.5 percent of the total workforce
has not had a job in the past six months; 15.3 percent have not in the
past year; and 9.2 percent have not in the past two years. You can see
this 1930s-style catastrophe in the chart below from the National Statistics Institute.
(Note:
The "already found work" category refers to people who did not have a
job at the time of the survey, but did have a job lined up).
Here's the story of Spanish unemployment in three acts. During the boom, joblessness was relatively high due to persistent structural problems.
Then it shot up fast and faster as Spain's building bust and then
Lehmangeddon hit in 2008. But it has kept climbing up since the panic
abated, albeit at a less catastrophic pace, due to the toxic combination
of too tight money and budgets.
In other words, austerity hasn't been the path to prosperity. It's been the path to perma-slump.
But the real story of the Spanish depression has been the story of the indignados:
the mostly young, long-term unemployed. It's a bit hard to see just how
dramatic it's been in the chart above, so I converted it to a line
chart below. Almost all of the increase in unemployment since 2010 has
been due to the increase in long-term unemployment of two years or more.
In other words, unemployment is a trap people fall into, but can't fall out of. Indeed, the rate of new unemployment
has stabilized at a terrible, but not quite-as-terrible, level, as you
can see with the flat blue, red, and green lines. But the steadily
rising purple line shows us that the rate of job-finding for the jobless
has collapsed.
That is what a permanent underclass looks like.
That is what a permanent underclass looks like.
Housing Lows and Hiring Laws Feed a Disaster
Why has Spain's jobs depression been so great? After all, its GDP is "only" 4.1 percent below
its 2007 level, compared to 5.8 percent below for Portugal, 7 percent
below for Italy, and 20 percent below for Greece. But despite this
better (negative) growth, unemployment is higher in Spain than the
others. In other words, Spanish unemployment isn't just about inadequate
demand. Part of it is structural.
Spain's
labor market problems fall into two big buckets: too much regulation,
and not enough education. It's almost impossible for companies to get
rid of older workers, which creates a horribly bifurcated labor market.
There are permanent workers who can't be fired, and temporary ones who
can -- and are. Indeed, as Clive Crook
points out, about a third of Spain's workforce are temporary workers
who enjoy few protections and fewer opportunities. Companies go through
these younger workers without bothering to invest much in their human
capital, because why would they? These temporary workers will be let go
at the first sign of economic trouble. Young people get stuck in a
never-ending cycle of under-and-unemployment since firms are always
hesitant to hire permanent workers who will always be on their books.
But
it gets worse. The housing bust hasn't just cast a shadow over
household and bank balance sheets; it's cast one over young people's
educations too. At its peak, building made up a whopping 19 percent of
Spain's economy, which, as Tobias Buck of the Financial Times
points out, lured many young men into dropping out of school for
well-paying construction gigs. But now that building has gone into
hibernation, all of those young men are left with no work and no
education to fall back on. And, again, even if they can find temporary
jobs, it's not as if the companies will spend money to develop their
skills.
No Hope
It's hard to see
anything resembling a case for optimism. Even though the Spanish
government's borrowing costs have fallen since the ECB introduced its
backstop, Spanish business borrowing costs have not. Small and medium-sized enterprises can't get capital except on prohibitively expensive terms. As Ryan Avent of The Economist
points out, this broken monetary transmission mechanism means austerity
is hurting Spain more than it otherwise would -- which is clear enough
in the data. Despite its cuts, Spain's deficit actually worsened from
9.4 percent of GDP in 2011 to 10.6 percent of GDP in 2012, because its economy fell more than its borrowing costs. The only hint of good news here is Spain just announced it will take two more years to hit its deficit target. But less (self-defeating) austerity isn't enough. Spain needs stimulus. And it might need bailouts too (or, if Cyprus does turn out to be a "template", bail-ins). Indeed, The Economist calculates Spanish housing prices are still overvalued by 20 percent or so -- which will be even more bad news for its banks.
I
wasn't exaggerating when I said this is one of the most terrifying
things I have ever seen. Spain needs shock therapy for its labor
markets, but that's an impossible political sell when more than a
quarter of the population is unemployed. In an ideal world, Spain would
pair major reforms with major stimulus; in the real world, it will drag
its feet on reforms, try to cut its deficit, and fall deeper into
depression.
Let me leave you with this, well,
depressing question: Assuming everything goes perfectly, how long will
it be till Spanish unemployment gets below 20 percent?
Don't answer that.
Bundesbank declares 'war' on Mario Draghi bond bail-out at Germany's top court
Germany’s Bundesbank has issued a devastating attack on the bond rescue policies of the European Central Bank, rendering the eurozone’s key crisis measure almost unworkable.
The Draghi plan mobilized the ECB as lender of last resort and led to a spectacular fall in borrowing costs across the EMU periphery, buying nine months of financial calm
The hardline central bank - known as the temple of monetary orthodoxy - told
Germany’s top court that the ECB’s pledge to shore up Italian and Spanish
debt entails huge risks and violates fundamental principles. “It is not the
duty of the ECB to rescue states in crisis,” it wrote in a 29-page document
leaked to Handelsblatt.
The Bundesbank unleashed a point by point assault on every claim made by ECB
chief Mario Draghi to justify emergency rescue policies - or Outright
Monetary Transactions (OMT) - unveiled last summer to stop Spain’s debt
crisis spiralling out of control.
The Draghi plan mobilized the ECB as lender of last resort and led to a
spectacular fall in borrowing costs across the EMU periphery, buying nine
months of financial calm. The credibility of the pledge rests entirely on
German consent. Analysts say the crisis could erupt again at any moment if
that is called into question.
“The report borders on economic warfare,” said Harvinder Sian from RBS. “We
think there is going to be fear and dread in the market that the court will
reject OMT.”
The document said OMT entails the purchase of “bad bonds”, violates ECB
independence and entails a high risk of heavy losses in the “not unlikely”
event that debtor states are forced out of EMU.
It said Greek debacle had shown that conditions cannot be enforced, and, in
any case, is “very questionable” whether it is desirable to drive down the
borrowing costs of profligate states.
To cap it all, the Bundesbank said the ECB has no mandate to uphold the “current composition of monetary union”. Its task is to uphold price stability and let the chips fall where they may.
While the Bundesbank's president, Jens Weidmann, has openly criticised the Draghi plan before, the aggressive language in the report shocked economists. The document was submitted in December but was not revealed until Friday.
Germany’s constitutional court will rule on the legality of the bond rescue plan on June 12. It gave a provisional go-ahead last September for other parts of the EMU rescue machinery, but limited Germany’s bail-out share to €190bn (£160bn). Crucially, it warned that the Bundestag may not alienate its tax and spending powers to any supra-national body or be exposed to “unlimited” liabilities.
“If the court rules against OMT, it means the end of the euro. The stakes are so high that I don’t see how they could just pull the trigger,” said Mats Persson from Open Europe.
He said the Draghi plan is a legal hot potato because it is, by definition, unlimited. “The previous rulings by the court have all been predicated on this point.”
German historian Michael Stürmer said the tough report is a bid by the Bundesbank to “reassert its primacy”. “They have told the ECB in no uncertain terms that it is exceeding its mandate. Angela Merkel may be smiling because this helps her set limits in Europe.”
Prof Sturmer said the forthcoming ruling - wider than just the Draghi plan - is “much more serious” than last September’s judgment, limited to an injunction brought by eurosceptic groups. “This is about issues of sovereignty. I don’t think the Court will dare to issue a ruling before the elections in September. They will procrastinate,” he said.
The court has some jurisdiction over ECB policy because it intrudes on the German Grundgesetz, or Basic Law. “Once the ECB starts bailing out states it is moving into dangerous waters,” he said.
The court made a glancing reference to OMT in September, stating that ECB bond purchases “aimed at financing the members budgets is prohibited, as it would circumvent the ban on monetary financing”.
The bond markets ignored the leaked report on Friday, confident that the court will once again find some formula to avert a crisis. It could cite a clause in the Lisbon Treaty stating that the ECB has a duty to “support the general economic policies in the Union”, which would include saving the euro.
“They might refer the case to the European Court but that would leave the Sword of Damocles hanging over the market for another two years,” said David Marsh, author of books on the Bundesbank and EMU. “I think use of OMT is practically impossible until this is resolved.”
Sovereign bond strategist Nicholas Spiro said markets are “sick and tired” of the eurozone debt crisis and have stopped paying attention to the detail. “There is this ravenous hunt for yield and they think there is all this money coming from Japan. But it has long been unclear whether OMT is real or just a myth, and the eurozone’s underlying economic crisis is still getting worse. The window of opportunity created by Draghi has been wasted.
“If the court sides with the Bundesbank in any way the whole house of cards could come crashing down.”
To cap it all, the Bundesbank said the ECB has no mandate to uphold the “current composition of monetary union”. Its task is to uphold price stability and let the chips fall where they may.
While the Bundesbank's president, Jens Weidmann, has openly criticised the Draghi plan before, the aggressive language in the report shocked economists. The document was submitted in December but was not revealed until Friday.
Germany’s constitutional court will rule on the legality of the bond rescue plan on June 12. It gave a provisional go-ahead last September for other parts of the EMU rescue machinery, but limited Germany’s bail-out share to €190bn (£160bn). Crucially, it warned that the Bundestag may not alienate its tax and spending powers to any supra-national body or be exposed to “unlimited” liabilities.
“If the court rules against OMT, it means the end of the euro. The stakes are so high that I don’t see how they could just pull the trigger,” said Mats Persson from Open Europe.
He said the Draghi plan is a legal hot potato because it is, by definition, unlimited. “The previous rulings by the court have all been predicated on this point.”
German historian Michael Stürmer said the tough report is a bid by the Bundesbank to “reassert its primacy”. “They have told the ECB in no uncertain terms that it is exceeding its mandate. Angela Merkel may be smiling because this helps her set limits in Europe.”
Prof Sturmer said the forthcoming ruling - wider than just the Draghi plan - is “much more serious” than last September’s judgment, limited to an injunction brought by eurosceptic groups. “This is about issues of sovereignty. I don’t think the Court will dare to issue a ruling before the elections in September. They will procrastinate,” he said.
The court has some jurisdiction over ECB policy because it intrudes on the German Grundgesetz, or Basic Law. “Once the ECB starts bailing out states it is moving into dangerous waters,” he said.
The court made a glancing reference to OMT in September, stating that ECB bond purchases “aimed at financing the members budgets is prohibited, as it would circumvent the ban on monetary financing”.
The bond markets ignored the leaked report on Friday, confident that the court will once again find some formula to avert a crisis. It could cite a clause in the Lisbon Treaty stating that the ECB has a duty to “support the general economic policies in the Union”, which would include saving the euro.
“They might refer the case to the European Court but that would leave the Sword of Damocles hanging over the market for another two years,” said David Marsh, author of books on the Bundesbank and EMU. “I think use of OMT is practically impossible until this is resolved.”
Sovereign bond strategist Nicholas Spiro said markets are “sick and tired” of the eurozone debt crisis and have stopped paying attention to the detail. “There is this ravenous hunt for yield and they think there is all this money coming from Japan. But it has long been unclear whether OMT is real or just a myth, and the eurozone’s underlying economic crisis is still getting worse. The window of opportunity created by Draghi has been wasted.
“If the court sides with the Bundesbank in any way the whole house of cards could come crashing down.”
Politics: While Wronged Homeowners Got $300 Apiece in Foreclosure Settlement, Consultants Who Helped Protect Banks Got $2 Billion
Full Size Image
The obscene greed-and-arrogance stories emanating from Wall Street are piling up so fast, it's getting hard to keep up. This one is from last week, but I missed it – it's about the foreclosure/robo-signing settlement that was concluded earlier this year.
The upshot of this story is that in advance of that notorious settlement, the government ordered banks to hire "independent" consultants to examine their loan files to see just exactly how corrupt they were.
Now it comes out that not only were these consultants not so independent, not only did they very likely skew the numbers seriously in favor of the banks, and not only were these few consultants paid over $2 billion (over 20 percent of the entire settlement amount) while the average homeowner only received $300 in the deal – in addition to all of that, it appears that federal regulators will not turn over the evidence of impropriety they discovered during these reviews to homeowners who may want to sue the banks.
In other words, the government not only ordered the banks to hire consultants who may have gamed the foreclosure settlement in favor of the banks, but the regulators themselves are hiding the information from the public in order to shield the banks from further lawsuits.
Secrets and Lies of the Bailout
To recap: in the foreclosure deal, 13 banks agreed to pay a total of $9.3 billion to settle their liability in a number of areas, including robo-signing, which is just a euphemism for mass-perjury – robo-signing is the practice of having low-level bank employees sign documents attesting to full knowledge of case files in court foreclosure actions, when in fact they were signing hundreds of files per day, often having no idea whether the paperwork was correct or not.
It was done across the industry and turned housing cases across America into nightmares of jumbled and/or forged paperwork, in which even people who did not deserve to be thrown out of their homes were uprooted thanks to systematic errors by faceless bureaucrats who cut legal corners purely to save money.
The obscene greed-and-arrogance stories emanating from Wall Street are piling up so fast, it's getting hard to keep up. This one is from last week, but I missed it – it's about the foreclosure/robo-signing settlement that was concluded earlier this year.
The upshot of this story is that in advance of that notorious settlement, the government ordered banks to hire "independent" consultants to examine their loan files to see just exactly how corrupt they were.
Now it comes out that not only were these consultants not so independent, not only did they very likely skew the numbers seriously in favor of the banks, and not only were these few consultants paid over $2 billion (over 20 percent of the entire settlement amount) while the average homeowner only received $300 in the deal – in addition to all of that, it appears that federal regulators will not turn over the evidence of impropriety they discovered during these reviews to homeowners who may want to sue the banks.
In other words, the government not only ordered the banks to hire consultants who may have gamed the foreclosure settlement in favor of the banks, but the regulators themselves are hiding the information from the public in order to shield the banks from further lawsuits.
Secrets and Lies of the Bailout
To recap: in the foreclosure deal, 13 banks agreed to pay a total of $9.3 billion to settle their liability in a number of areas, including robo-signing, which is just a euphemism for mass-perjury – robo-signing is the practice of having low-level bank employees sign documents attesting to full knowledge of case files in court foreclosure actions, when in fact they were signing hundreds of files per day, often having no idea whether the paperwork was correct or not.
It was done across the industry and turned housing cases across America into nightmares of jumbled and/or forged paperwork, in which even people who did not deserve to be thrown out of their homes were uprooted thanks to systematic errors by faceless bureaucrats who cut legal corners purely to save money.
Grace Dent: If every man or woman’s home is their castle, who cares if it costs £1 to buy?
This is a strange, slightly hippy commune vibe mixed with the arch-Tory values of “one’s home is one’s castle” and “get out and scrub your step”. I really rather love it.
Stoke-on-Trent’s local authority has offered up 35 derelict homes for sale – mainly two-bedroom, terraced properties – for the pocket-friendly sum of £1. The homes, or shells of homes, are one mile from the city centre in the Portland Street area of Cobridge, currently standing boarded up, forgotten, neglected, the roads around a hot spot for fly-tipping. The corner shop and local pub disappeared in 2009.
Take away the cosmetic problems, however, and what you’ve got is rows of terraced houses. Like the one I grew up in during the Seventies. We were an army of kids playing day after day in the street on rollerskates and BMXs. Not remotely deluxe, yet secure, with a bed to sleep in, and happy. This shouldn’t be an impossible dream for new young families. Every corner of the land has houses standing empty. A similar scheme in Liverpool’s Kensington seems so far to be very successful. This is not bulldozing in the name of regeneration, but instead it’s a strange, slightly hippie commune vibe mixed with the arch-Tory values of “one’s home is one’s castle” and “get out and scrub your step”. Politically, it’s everywhere and I really rather love it.
The rules for the purchase seem refreshingly sensible. If you want to apply for a £1 home, you must have a moderate income or joint income of £18,000 to £25,000 a year. If you have kids, you are allowed to earn up to £30,000. On a salary like this, there is little way one can ever save up a deposit to buy unless you have a rich mummy and daddy who will help. This is very much a scheme to help local families get a leg up onto the property ladder; thus one must have lived in the city for the past three years. Likewise, property developers can sling their hook, and owning any other properties is strictly prohibited. Plus, your new £1 home must be your main residence for at least five years. Notably, if you do live in the homge for 10 years, then you’ll find yourself in the very freeing and zen-like position of being rent and mortgage free.
If you buy a £1 home, you will be offered a loan of £30,000 to make the house habitable. At last, all those years as a nation being dripfed Sarah Beeny have come to fruition. These £1 homes are for people who do not fear the clatter of the wallpapering table and the slap of emulsion. Or at least don’t mind making a lot of tea while a local painter and decorator does it. If you take out the loan, they want it back within 10 years – at an interest rate of 3 per cent above the Bank of England base rate, which is 0.5 per cent. Despite the strict rules, 600 people had applied for the homes within 24 hours. When something like the £1 house scheme seems as wholly reasonable and ethically watertight as this, I always try to envisage who could possibly be offended or alienated. This is what halts progress at a local level. I watched, with some fascination, a local Lib Dem councillor spend many years opposing the regeneration of a dilapidated building for flats due to his “concerns about parking”. There have been mumblings about the £1 houses, with claims that they are “patronising” and will only introduce ghettos. I’ve thought about this, and if it’s a ghetto of people who really love DIY and faffing about with soft furnishings, I should like to buy a home very near to it.
Others suggest they should give all empty homes to a co-op, which fixes them up for people with no desire “get on the property ladder”. But, I’ll whisper this, owning one’s own home, and answering to no landlord, is a wholly agreeable state. Bulldozing broken communities, then telling the £25k earning bracket they wouldn’t have wanted a £1 house anyway – now that sounds pretty damn patronising.
Paltrow’s recipe for eating disorders
Being a woman is very often hard. You may have heard me occasionally mention it. Thank heavens we’ve got Gwyneth Paltrow’s new quack-science, semi-starvation recipe book, It’s All Good, being shoved down our throats on every TV show to keep us zinging with energy.Paltrow is a lovely, watchable actress. She has a likeable sense of humour in interviews. I like her husband Chris. I am not anti-Gwyneth. However, I am against the wholly cynical, harmful machine-pushing of a famous woman – who has endless Hollywood-style food allergies and phobias, and who arguably needs to fit into size 0 costumes to earn her living – into the role of food expert. I am not alluding to the idea that Paltrow barely eats; that’s there as fact in full colour with hundreds of feeble dinner-dodging words. Doctors – of whom she has seen many – have decreed Paltrow to be allergic to pretty much everything, including peppers, corn and aubergine. The book’s recipes are designed to facilitate a short-term elimination diet that eschews processed foods, coffee, alcohol, dairy, eggs, sugar, shellfish, deep-water fish, wheat, meat, and soy. Sometimes she lets loose and has pomegranate and quinoa. Behold the dinner suggestion – featured on last week’s Goop newsletter – of a small poached egg, three grilled spring onions and two small steamed pieces of broccoli. Two hundred calories of pure sustenance. Yummy. Back in the real world, if I was queuing up in the office canteen and saw a young girl with that on her plate, I’d think: “That’s an eating disorder. I hope she’s got someone keeping an eye on her.” But with an Oscar and an Emmy under her belt, suddenly we’re asking her for weight-loss tips. Life is short: get some macaroni cheese and a glass of red down your throat. I can assure you, it won’t kill you.
The Financial Tyranny of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR)
“There does exist, and has existed for a generation, an international Anglophile network which operates, to some extent in the way the radical Right believes the Communist act. In fact, this network, which we may identify as the Round Table Groups [called the CFR in the USA], has no aversion to cooperating with the Communists, or any other groups, and frequently does so. I know of the operation of this network because I…was permitted for two years, in the early 1960s, to examine its papers and secret records.” [Professor Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope, p.950]
“The powers of financial capitalism has another far reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole.” [Quigley, pp.324]
The “wise” Insiders who have been guiding the CFR toward global control include familiar names such as David Rockefeller, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Henry Kissinger, George Shultz, Bill Clinton, Brent Scowcroft…. These men have led and instructed our presidents’ cabinets again and again. They and countless others work silently behind the scenes to accomplish their goal of a socialist/communitarian world government. They may call themselves Republican or Democrats; it doesn’t really matter. They control the financial resources needed to manipulate the economy and accomplish their goals.
Their tyrannical form of “capitalism” destroys the personal incentive, moral guidelines and free enterprise that made America great.
“Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil…
Who put darkness for light, and light for darkness;
Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes..” Isaiah 5:20-21
History
In the 1870s, Oxford professor John Ruskin persuaded
his elite British students that “they had a moral obligation to
disseminate English culture and unite the world under British rule. [1]
By early 1900s, many of his students held strategic positions in the
English Government. None of his students would spread the vision more
effectively than Cecil Rhodes, who accumulated the needed wealth in
African gold and diamond mines. Rhodes wrote,
“The Society ['of the Elect'] should inspire and even own portions of the press for the press rules the mind of the people. The Society should always be searching for members who might by their position in the world by their energies or character forward the object…”[2]
In 1987, Rhodes sent his friend W. T. Stead a letter explaining his plan for world government:
“The key of my idea discussed with you is a Society, copied from the Jesuits as to organization [rising levels of secrecy as in Freemasonry]… an idea which ultimately (leads) to the cessation of all wars and one language throughout the world…. The only thing feasible to carry this idea out is a secret one [a secret society] gradually absorbing the wealth of the world to be devoted to such an object.”[3, p.13]
To fulfill his global vision, Rhodes established the Rhodes Trust. The inner circle of this “secret society” – “The Society of the Elect” — included freemason Lord Alfred Milner, William T. Stead and Reginald Baliol Brett (titled Lord Esher). When Rhodes died in 1902, he left the “Society,” the Rhodes Trust and the leadership primarily in the “hands” of Lord Milner. This Round Table Group would eventually establish numerous international branches. In the U.S.A, it would be called the Council of Foreign Relations (CFR).
Few have done more to expose this revolutionary agenda than Carrol Quigley, the history professor at the Foreign Service Schools of Georgetown University whom Clinton honored in his acceptance speech at the Democratic Convention, July 16, 1992. In his 1300-page tome, Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time, Quigley wrote:
“By 1915, Round Table Groups existed in seven countries, including England…(and) the United States…. Since 1925, there have been substantial contributions from wealthy individuals, and from foundations and firms associated with the international banking fraternity, especially… organizations associated with J. P. Morgan, the Rockefeller and Whitney families….” [5-Quigley, 950-951]
In 1913, President Woodrow Wilson expressed his concern over this secret movement toward world government his book, The New Freedom:
“We are in a new world…. In the new order, government and business must be associated closely…. We stand in the presence of a revolution…. (which) will come in peaceful guise…”[That sounds like Fabian Socialism!]
“Some of the biggest men in the U.S., in the field of commerce and manufacturing, are afraid of somebody, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it…. We have been dreading all along the time when the combined power of high finance would be greater than the power of government….
“We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated, governments in the civilized world—no longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and duress of small groups of dominant men….We stand in the presence of a revolution… (which) will come in peaceful guise.”[4-Cuddy, pp.24-25]
That same year, President Wilson signed the Federal Reserve Act with the guidance of Frank Vanderlip, president of Rockefeller’s National City Bank.”[4-Cuddy, p.25]
The CFR was founded in 1921, mainly through the “mysterious” Round Table “Insider” Col. Mandel House, President Wilson’s “counter-ego.” It would be the U.S. equivalent of Britain’s Royal Institute of International Affairs. Professor Quigley explains:
“At the end of the war of 1914, it became clear that the organization of this system had to be greatly extended… the tasks was entrusted to Lionel Curtis who established, in England and each dominion, a front organization to the existing local Round Table Group. This front organization called the Royal Institute of International Affairs, had as its nucleus in each area the existing submerged Round Table Group. In New York it was known as the Council on Foreign Relations, and was a front for J. P. Morgan and Company….
“In fact, the original plans for the Royal Institute of International Affairs and the Council on Foreign Relations were drawn up at Paris.” [5-Quigley, 951-952]
To build the envisioned network of global support, it would spend tens of millions of dollars annually from the major tax-exempt foundations such as the Carnegie and Rockefeller foundations. [6, page 54]
Keep in mind, the CFR as a whole is not made up of secret conspirators. Its membership list is available to the public. “Most CFR members are not involved in a conspiracy,” wrote Anthony C. Sutton“and have no knowledge of any conspiracy. However,
“there is a GROUP WITHIN the Council of Foreign Relations which belongs to a secret society, sworn to secrecy, and which more or less controls the CFR. CFR meetings are used for their own purposes, i.e., to push out ideas, to weigh up people who might be useful, to use meetings as a form for discussion.”[7]
In other words, the layered organizational structure might be compared not only to Jesuits, as Cecil Rhodes indicated, but also to the Freemasons with its inner core of secret masters and occultists. Describing this monstrous financial structure with power to bribe and command governments around the world, New York city Mayor John Hylan gave this warning:
“…the real menace of our republic is this invisible government which like a giant octopus sprawls its slimy length over city, State and nation. Like the octopus of real life, it operates under cover of self-created screen. It seizes in its long and powerful tentacles our executive officers, our legislative bodies, our schools, our courts, our newspapers and every agency created for the public protection.”[4]
In Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time, Professor Quigley wrote:“The Society ['of the Elect'] should inspire and even own portions of the press for the press rules the mind of the people. The Society should always be searching for members who might by their position in the world by their energies or character forward the object…”[2]
In 1987, Rhodes sent his friend W. T. Stead a letter explaining his plan for world government:
“The key of my idea discussed with you is a Society, copied from the Jesuits as to organization [rising levels of secrecy as in Freemasonry]… an idea which ultimately (leads) to the cessation of all wars and one language throughout the world…. The only thing feasible to carry this idea out is a secret one [a secret society] gradually absorbing the wealth of the world to be devoted to such an object.”[3, p.13]
To fulfill his global vision, Rhodes established the Rhodes Trust. The inner circle of this “secret society” – “The Society of the Elect” — included freemason Lord Alfred Milner, William T. Stead and Reginald Baliol Brett (titled Lord Esher). When Rhodes died in 1902, he left the “Society,” the Rhodes Trust and the leadership primarily in the “hands” of Lord Milner. This Round Table Group would eventually establish numerous international branches. In the U.S.A, it would be called the Council of Foreign Relations (CFR).
Few have done more to expose this revolutionary agenda than Carrol Quigley, the history professor at the Foreign Service Schools of Georgetown University whom Clinton honored in his acceptance speech at the Democratic Convention, July 16, 1992. In his 1300-page tome, Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time, Quigley wrote:
“By 1915, Round Table Groups existed in seven countries, including England…(and) the United States…. Since 1925, there have been substantial contributions from wealthy individuals, and from foundations and firms associated with the international banking fraternity, especially… organizations associated with J. P. Morgan, the Rockefeller and Whitney families….” [5-Quigley, 950-951]
In 1913, President Woodrow Wilson expressed his concern over this secret movement toward world government his book, The New Freedom:
“We are in a new world…. In the new order, government and business must be associated closely…. We stand in the presence of a revolution…. (which) will come in peaceful guise…”[That sounds like Fabian Socialism!]
“Some of the biggest men in the U.S., in the field of commerce and manufacturing, are afraid of somebody, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it…. We have been dreading all along the time when the combined power of high finance would be greater than the power of government….
“We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated, governments in the civilized world—no longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and duress of small groups of dominant men….We stand in the presence of a revolution… (which) will come in peaceful guise.”[4-Cuddy, pp.24-25]
That same year, President Wilson signed the Federal Reserve Act with the guidance of Frank Vanderlip, president of Rockefeller’s National City Bank.”[4-Cuddy, p.25]
The CFR was founded in 1921, mainly through the “mysterious” Round Table “Insider” Col. Mandel House, President Wilson’s “counter-ego.” It would be the U.S. equivalent of Britain’s Royal Institute of International Affairs. Professor Quigley explains:
“At the end of the war of 1914, it became clear that the organization of this system had to be greatly extended… the tasks was entrusted to Lionel Curtis who established, in England and each dominion, a front organization to the existing local Round Table Group. This front organization called the Royal Institute of International Affairs, had as its nucleus in each area the existing submerged Round Table Group. In New York it was known as the Council on Foreign Relations, and was a front for J. P. Morgan and Company….
“In fact, the original plans for the Royal Institute of International Affairs and the Council on Foreign Relations were drawn up at Paris.” [5-Quigley, 951-952]
To build the envisioned network of global support, it would spend tens of millions of dollars annually from the major tax-exempt foundations such as the Carnegie and Rockefeller foundations. [6, page 54]
Keep in mind, the CFR as a whole is not made up of secret conspirators. Its membership list is available to the public. “Most CFR members are not involved in a conspiracy,” wrote Anthony C. Sutton“and have no knowledge of any conspiracy. However,
“there is a GROUP WITHIN the Council of Foreign Relations which belongs to a secret society, sworn to secrecy, and which more or less controls the CFR. CFR meetings are used for their own purposes, i.e., to push out ideas, to weigh up people who might be useful, to use meetings as a form for discussion.”[7]
In other words, the layered organizational structure might be compared not only to Jesuits, as Cecil Rhodes indicated, but also to the Freemasons with its inner core of secret masters and occultists. Describing this monstrous financial structure with power to bribe and command governments around the world, New York city Mayor John Hylan gave this warning:
“…the real menace of our republic is this invisible government which like a giant octopus sprawls its slimy length over city, State and nation. Like the octopus of real life, it operates under cover of self-created screen. It seizes in its long and powerful tentacles our executive officers, our legislative bodies, our schools, our courts, our newspapers and every agency created for the public protection.”[4]
“The argument that the two [political] parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to the doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead the two parties should be almost identical, so the that American people can ‘throw the rascals out’ at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy.” [5-Quigley, pp.1247-1248]
“One of Professor Quigley’s most shocking revelations,” wrote Dr. Monteith,
“was the fact that the American Communist Party was partly financed by J. P. Morgan and Company…. J. P. Morgan and his associates financed the Republican Party, the Democratic Party, conservative groups, liberal organizations, communist groups and anti-communist organizations. Thus we should not be surprised to learn that someone purchased Professor Quigley’s publisher and destroyed the plates to the first half of his book so it couldn’t be reprinted.” [1, pp. 99-100]
That sounds like communitarianism, doesn’t it? Banks and tax-exempt foundations were essential to this global vision:
“The powers of financial capitalism has another far reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole…
“The apex of the system was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Bale, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world’s central banks [including the US Federal Reserve] which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank… sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards….”
“In 1924, the chairman of the board of the Midland Bank said, “…banks can and do create money… And they, who control the credit of the nation, direct the policy of Government and hold in the hollow of their hands the destiny of the people.” [5-Quigley, pp.324-325]
“During the early decades of the 20th century,” explained Dr. Monteith, “the three largest banks in the US were owned by the Rockefellers, the Morgan’s, and the Mellon’s.” Contrary to popular speculations, the powerful European central banks preceded the House of Rothschild. Jewish banks “never controlled the financial institutions of the world.” [1, p. 35]
There you have a glimpse into the hidden Anglo-American power structure and its European branches. To see how all the pieces fit together, we suggest you read Brotherhood of Darkness] by Dr. Stan Monteith.
CFR president Richard N. Haass: “Richard Haass is president of the Council on Foreign Relations, a position he has held since July 2003. The Council, based in New York with an office in Washington, DC, is an independent, national membership organization and a nonpartisan center for scholars dedicated to producing and disseminating ideas so that individual and corporate members, as well as policymakers, journalists, students, and interested citizens in the United States and other countries, can better understand the world and the foreign policy choices facing the United States and other governments….
“Until June 2003, Richard Haass was director of policy planning for the U.S. Department of State, where he was a principal adviser to Secretary of State Colin Powell on a broad range of foreign policy concerns. Confirmed by the U.S. Senate to hold the rank of ambassador, Haass served as U.S. coordinator for policy toward the future of Afghanistan….
“Haass also has been vice president and director of foreign policy studies at the Brookings Institution… a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, a lecturer in Public Policy at Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government, and a research associate at the International Institute for Strategic Studies. A Rhodes Scholar, Haass holds… both a Master and Doctor of Philosophy degrees from Oxford University.”
CFR’s Plan to Integrate the U.S., Mexico and Canada (Phyllis Schlafly) : “The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) has just let the cat out of the bag about what’s really behind our trade agreements and security partnerships with the other North American countries.
“…the CFR document calls for ‘a seamless North American market’ and for ‘the extension of full labor mobility to Mexico.’… adopting a ‘tested once’ principle for pharmaceuticals, by which a product tested in Mexico will automatically be considered to have met U.S. standards…. putting illegal aliens into the U.S. Social Security system, which is bound to bankrupt the system. ….a major fund to finance 60,000 Mexican students to study in U.S. colleges…. supervision by a North American Advisory Council of ‘eminent persons’.”
Building a North American Community (Council on Foreign Relations Press May 2005): “…a tri-national, Independent Task Force on the Future of North America has developed a roadmap to promote North American security and advance the well-being of citizens of all three countries…. The Council-sponsored Task Force applauds the announced ‘Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America,’ but proposes a more ambitious vision of a new community by 2010 and specific recommendations on how to achieve it.”
Big steps toward global control:
Creating a North American Community: Chairmen’s Press Briefing for an Independent Task Force on the Future of North America: “…last fall the Council of Foreign Relations, together with the Mexican Council of Foreign Relations and the Canadian Council of CEOs, launched a Task Force on the future of North America to examine our trilateral relationship and to suggest opportunities for deeper collaboration…..
“We talk about deeper cooperation, both law enforcement and defense….And we’ve opened the door to greater military cooperation on a trilateral basis, including with Mexico.
“…we ought to be looking to a North American energy strategy….
“…this is an opportunity for the three leaders of North American governments to build on a vision of the future, to try to capture what the architecture of a North American community in the 21st century in which China and India are becoming major economic and perhaps military players; in which Europe has coalesced around 25 members, a common currency, and little, if any, border controls internally.” Revelation 13
Panel Urges Greater North American Integration: “The privately-funded Council on Foreign Relations task force says the future of North America would be stronger, safer and more competitive if the three nations [Canada, Mexico & the U.S.] were to institutionalize their partnerships…. The task force also proposes a North American border pass for easier movement between the nations, and a ‘North American preference’ that would allow North American citizens to work anywhere in the region with far fewer restrictions that other immigrants. This would require reversal of the current U.S. policy calling for restrictions on travel in and out of the United States. The task force also calls for the creation of an investment fund aimed at narrowing the development gap between Mexico and its northern neighbors.” See The Merging of the Americas in a New Global Orde
Joint security perimeter for North America by 2010: “The leaders of Canada, Mexico and the United States will discuss a plan to beef up continental security and speed up movement across their borders when they meet next week.
” A report calls for the creation of a common economic and security community by the end of the decade. The document’s proposals would try to create a secure perimeter around the continent, while making it easier for people and goods to move across the shared borders….
“The report was jointly sponsored by the U.S. Council on Foreign Relations, the Canadian Council of Chief Executives and the Mexican Council on Foreign Relations. Among its chief recommendations: Unified visa and refugee regulations. Joint inspection of container traffic at ports. An integrated terror watch list. Biometric border passes to allow freer movement at borders…. A strategy to stimulate Mexican economic development.”
Immigration/US Borders: “Mexico will pursue legal action against plans by a U.S. citizens’ group to patrol the U.S.-Mexican border in search of illegal immigrants, the country’s foreign minister said on Monday. Luis Ernesto Derbez said he asked lawyers in Los Angeles to draw up a legal strategy to fight the Arizona-based initiative called ‘the MinuteMan Project’ that has signed up hundreds of volunteers for border patrols.” See Re-zoning the World: The Merging of the Americas in a New Global Order
Mega Cartels Headhunting US Sovereignty: “What is the FTAA? Answer: You’re not supposed to know….. The FTAA moniker for this legislation itself is a deception: Free Trade Area of the Americas….
“Negotiations on this agreement were initiated… during the Clinton Administration. They are now being vigorously pursued towards completion under the Bush Administration….
“…like its European prototype the FTAA has been carefully constructed as a framework not just as an economic union but also as a political union such as the European Union is in the final stage of becoming. Or, as the Wall Street Journal put it in a recent article: ‘For the U.S., a collapse (in FTAA talks) would be a big defeat in Washington’s efforts… to weave together the hemisphere politically.’
“Shall we weave then our political structure into harmony with the likes of Mexico, Brazil and Venezuela? These are socialist governments at best. In the end the FTAA is not about trade as much as it is about political disintegration of an old order… a non-elected, supra-national political entity that in its first phase calls for our US Congress to turn over its authority (and our nation’s sovereignty) in matters of trade, labor and environmental law….
“It does seem incredible that in this era of bashing the United Nations, particularly from GOP quarters, the Bush Administration is pushing headlong into a political arrangement that is rife with transfers of US Congressional power to UN bodies and initiatives. … Talk to your friends in Britain and Germany, who are waking up too late to the fact that the European Union really is a political merger that ends hundreds of years of their national independence.”
Global Banking: The Bank for International Settlements: “When David Rockefeller and Zbigniew Brzezinski founded the Trilateral Commission in 1973, the intent was to create a ‘New International Economic Order’ (NIEO). To this end, they brought together 300 elite corporate, political and academic leaders from North America, Japan and Europe….
…the Bank for International Settlements (BIS)…that controls the vast global banking system with the precision of a Swiss watch…. was founded in 1930…. In the aftermath of World War I and the impending collapse of the German economy and political structure, a plan was needed to rescue and restore Germany, which would also insulate other economies in Europe from being affected adversely…. In 1924 the Allies appointed a committee of international bankers, led by Charles G. Dawes (and accompanied by J.P. Morgan agent, Owen Young), to develop a plan to get reparations payments back on track….
[According to] Carroll Quigley: ‘The Power of financial capitalism had another far reaching plan, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalistic fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the system was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basle, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world’s central banks, which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank… sought to dominate its government by its ability to control treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence co-operative politicians by subsequent rewards in the business world.”
Irreversible Consequences?
Beware the Secret Heart of the EU [by Ashley Mote, an independent member of the European Parliament]: “Even the EU’s public face – the unelected commission – is part of the charade. Power does not lie with them. It lies with the senior staff running their departments, entrenched by some 3000 working groups and committees on which no elected MEP sits…. We do not know what their budgets are, how they are financed, or who approves their costs. Indeed, we do not even know what powers they have been given, nor by whom. And we cannot get rid of them….
“The EU would no longer be the servant of the member states. It would have become their master. Every previous treaty was a small step along that road…. The other 24 commissioners, each appointed by the other member states… are figure-heads. They take the flak in the public arena, and make announcements decided for them by their senior staff, with the guidance of the secret committees.
“…officially above the commission sits a Council of Ministers…. But the council is just more of the same elaborate illusion of accountable government. … The European Parliament sits below this vast superstructure… designed to create an illusion of accountable democracy. A condescending pat on the head for voters held in contempt.
“…the EU’s parliament has a built-in majority in favour of the social market. It is the repository of an unspoken agreement between the left and the multinationals. … In effect, the left has said to the multinationals: you can have your markets stitched up for you, if we can indulge ourselves in endless social engineering. Big business has agreed. The result is a largely supportive parliament both from the left and right of the political divide.” The “Americas” is moving in the same direction! See The Revolutionary Roots of the UN and the next link:
Confronting Climate Change A Strategy for U.S. Foreign Policy: “…recent failure of the Senate to advance the Lieberman-Warner climate bill, and preparations for this summer’s G8 summit, a CFR-sponsored Independent Task Force recommends an overhaul of U.S. domestic and foreign policy to confront the challenge. …the Task Force says that the United States must leverage ambitious, comprehensive, and equitable action at home to advance an effective policy abroad. It lays out a U.S. negotiating strategy for a global climate accord, outlining what the United States should be willing to offer and what it should expect others, including the rapidly emerging economies, to do in return….
Here a some of the Task Force Members (and CFR leaders):
- Jonathan Lash has served as president of the World Resources Institute since 1993. A former co-chair of President Clinton’s Council on Sustainable Devel, federal prosecutor, and law professor, Mr. Lash serves on the advisory board of Generation Investment Management….
- Michael A. Levi is the David M. Rubenstein senior fellow for energy and environment at the Council on Foreign Relations and director of its program on energy security and climate change…..
- William K. Reilly is a founding partner of Aqua International Partners, LP, a private equity fund dedicated to investing in companies engaged in water and renewable energy, and a senior adviser to TPG Capital, LP. Mr. Reilly served as administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, president of the World Wildlife Fund, and president of the Conservation Foundation. He was head of the U.S.delegation to the United Nations Earth Summit at Rioin 1992…..
- David M. Rubenstein is a cofounder and managing director of the Carlyle Group>….
- Timothy E. Wirth…. As president of the UN Foundation (UNF) [founded and funded by Ted Turner, who has expressed his desire for the death of most of the world's population] since its inception in early 1998, Wirth has organized and led the formulation of the Foundation’s mission and program priorities, which include the environment, women and population, children’s health, and peace, security and human rights. [It seems that those most involved in "human rights" are least concerned about actual humans. Could they be there to steer global decisions on whose "rights" should be favored?] Senator Wirth served in the U.S. House of Representatives from 1975 to 1987 and in the Senate from 1987 to 1993. Following these two decades of elected politics, Wirth was national co-chair of the Clinton-Gore campaign, and served in the U.S. Department of State as the first undersecretary for global affairs from 1993 to 1997. He chaired the U.S. delegation at the 1994 Cairo Conference on Population and Development and was the lead U.S. negotiator for the Kyoto Climate Conference until late 1997. He was recently honored as a Champion of the Earth by the United Nations Environment Programme…..
- James D. Wolfensohn is chairman of Wolfensohn & Company, LLC, a private investment firm, and an adviser to corporations and governments…and to Citi’s senior management on global strategy and on international matters. Mr. Wolfensohn was the ninth president of the World Bank Group.<
The Fabians, the Round Table, and the Rhodes Scholars: “The aims of the Fabian Society were developed by Webb from what Englishman John Ruskin (1819-1900) taught at Oxford University. Ruskin, a teacher at the Working Men’s College (founded in 1854 by Christian-Socialist philosopher J. F. D. Maurice), a professor of Fine Arts at Oxford, an artist and writer, based his views on those of Socialist Robert Owen. He advocated a utopian society….
“The Fabians were working towards a new world by indoctrinating young scholars who would eventually rise to power in various policy-making positions throughout the world by infiltrating educational institutions, government agencies, and political parties. Their strategy was called the ‘doctrine of inevitability of gradualism,’ which meant that their goals would be gradually achieved. So gradual, that nobody would notice, or ‘without breach of continuity or abrupt change of the entire social issue.’…
“In 1905, American Fabians established the Rand School of [Social Science] in New York City. On September 12, 1905, five of the Fabians met at Peck’s Restaurant in New York’s Lower Manhattan: Upton Sinclair (well-known author and socialist), Jack London (well-known fiction writer), Rev. Thomas Wentworth Higginson (a Unitarian minister), J.G. Phelps Stokes, and Clarence Darrow (legendary lawyer). They incorporated the Intercollegiate Socialist Society for the purpose of promoting ‘an intelligent interest in socialism among college men and women,’ and established chapters at Harvard, Princeton, Columbia, New York University, and the University of Pennsylvania. Their true purpose was to begin de-Christianizing America. One of its founding members was John Dewey, the father of progressive education, whose philosophy consisted of ‘atheism, socialism and evolution.’”
Surrounded by threatening armies, King Jehoshaphat prayed for God’s help:
“O Lord God of our fathers, are You not God in heaven, and do You not rule over all the kingdoms of the nations, and in Your hand is there not power and might, so that no one is able to withstand You? …O our God, will You not judge them? For we have no power against this great multitude that is coming against us; nor do we know what to do, but our eyes are upon You.”
Then God answered his prayer:
“Do not be afraid nor dismayed because of this great multitude, for the battle is not yours, but God’s…. You will not need to fight in this battle. Position yourselves, stand still and see the salvation of the Lord, Who is with you…
Do not fear or be dismayed; tomorrow go out against them, for the Lord is with you.” 2 Chronicles 20:6-17
Notes:
1. Stanley Monteith, MD, Brotherhood of Darkness (Oklahoma City: Hearthstone Publishing, 2000).
2. http://dev.prenhall.com/divisions/hss/app/BW_TEST/Western_History/documents/Cecil_Rhodes_Confession_of_Faith_.htm
3.Dennis L. Cuddy, Ph.D., Secret Records Revealed (Oklahoma City: Heartstone Publishing, 1994), pages 30, 32.
4. Dennis L. Cuddy, Ph.D., Chronology of Education with Quotable Quotes (Pro Family Forum, Highland City, FL 33846, 1994); pages 24.
5. Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time (New York: The MacMillan Company, 1966).
6. William Jasper, Global Tyranny (Appleton, Wisconsin: Western Islands, 1992), pp. 51-54.
7. Anthony C. Sutton, America’s Secret Society,1986, p.3.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)