CFR Member Calls on Elites to “Rise Up Against Ignorant Masses”

[Ares]

In a column for Foreign Policy Magazine, Council on Foreign Relations member James Traub argues that the elite need to “rise up” against the “mindlessly angry” ignorant masses in order to prevent globalization from being derailed by the populist revolt that led to Brexit and the rise of Donald Trump.

Concerned that, “Today’s citizen revolt — in the United States, Britain, and Europe — may upend politics as nothing else has in my lifetime,” Traub notes that Brexit was an “utter repudiation of….bankers and economists” and an example of how “extremism has gone mainstream”.

Citing the potential for Trump to split the Republican Party even if he loses and the increasing unpopularity of France’s socialist government, Traub argues that establishment political parties in major western countries must “combine forces to keep out the nationalists”.

“With prospects of flat growth in Europe and minimal income growth in the United States, voters are rebelling against their dismal long-term prospects,” writes Traub. “And globalization means culture as well as economics: Older people whose familiar world is vanishing beneath a welter of foreign tongues and multicultural celebrations are waving their fists at cosmopolitan elites.”

Traub’s tone is so contemptuous, he even describes the pro-Trump Republican base as “know nothing” voters and sneers at voters in Poland for being concerned about “values and tradition,” while stressing that the push for further globalization will pit “poor and non-white and marginal citizens” against “working-class and middle-class whites,” whom he describes as angry “fist-shakers”.

Traub admits that his outlook is “elitist” but that, “It is necessary to say that people are deluded and that the task of leadership is to un-delude them.”

Reaction to the article was piercingly vitriolic, with one respondent commenting, “If you’ve ever wondered what the conversations between aristocrats were like as the peasants were storming the Bastille, I suspect some of them were a lot like this Foreign Policy article.”

The piece is yet another stunning example of how disconnected elites are to the people whom they insult and wish to rule over.

Traub, a Harvard graduate from a super-wealthy family that owns the Bloomingdale’s chain of luxury department stores, has no idea whatsoever how things like mass uncontrolled immigration, deindustrialization and globalization impact ordinary working westerners.

His sneering pomposity is precisely why many Brits voted for Brexit and why many Americans will vote for Donald Trump.

In refusing to listen to or understand the concerns of hundreds of millions of people who have been disenfranchised by globalism, and instead arrogantly doubling down on his chutzpah, Traub is only ensuring that more people will join the populist revolt that led to Brexit in the first place.

http://www.infowars.com/cfr-member-calls-on-elites-to-rise-up-against-ignorant-masses/

[Shami-Amourae]

https://media2.8ch.net/pol/src/1467165339702.png

[midnight rambler]

So Traub the Chosenite is 91 y.o. Fuck that old POS fossil Chosenite. Talk about 'privilege' and 'entitled'.

[Joshua01]

Bring it on. Let's rock and roll!

[Cebu_4_2]

So Traub the Chosenite is 91 y.o. Fuck that old POS fossil Chosenite. Talk about 'privilege' and 'entitled'.

Unless there are 2 james traubs the guy is 62...

http://foreignpolicy.com/author/james-traub/

[midnight rambler]

Unless there are 2 james traubs the guy is 62...

http://foreignpolicy.com/author/james-traub/

Misread Shami's post, James' father Marvin was born in 1925. Still Chosenites though, and still got the Chosenite privilege and entitlement things going on.

[Santa]

(((Time for the Elite to rise up against the ignorant masses)))

That would make for a funny T-shirt slogan.

[Ares]

(((Time for the Elite to rise up against the ignorant masses)))

That would make for a funny T-shirt slogan.



I have a sneaking feeling that some of them realize that if they were to "rise up" against the "ignorant masses" that they know they are wholly out numbered 500,000,000 to 1 and will most likely end up at the end of a rope decorating a tree.

[Joshua01]

I have a sneaking feeling that some of them realize that if they were to "rise up" against the "ignorant masses" that they know they are wholly out numbered 500,000,000 to 1 and will most likely end up at the end of a rope decorating a tree.

Stop trying to cheer me up

[Santa]

It's a bit ironic that nationalism has become a global issue and that globalism has become a national issue.

[Joshua01]

The elites pay someone with guns to defend them. The ignorant do the job themselves to be sure it's done right!

[Ares]

Stop trying to cheer me up

I think thats why they are pulling so many false flags attempting to implement gun control. They know they will be the ones the guns are pointed at when shit starts failing.

[Joshua01]

I think thats why they are pulling so many false flags attempting to implement gun control. They know they will be the ones the guns are pointed at when shit starts failing.

Removing the majority of the 350 million guns from the 'ignorant' will be a lot tougher then they think. Many of us ignorant people like our guns and ammo and won't hand them over as long as we're breathing. That may put a little kink in their plans

[Ares]

Removing the majority of the 350 million guns from the 'ignorant' will be a lot tougher then they think. Many of us ignorant people like our guns and ammo and won't hand them over as long as we're breathing. That may put a little kink in their plans

I honestly think they are surprised that after all the "mass killings" we haven't budged an inch on their stupid gun control attempts. Even in Connecticut where they implemented a gun registration process for "assault weapons" they got less than 1/10 of 1% to even register their guns. Most of those guys according to the state are now "felons" but since there were so many, and so many "unregistered" weapons in the hands of the "ignorant masses" they have virtually no way to enforce their moronic registration law.

The down side is, is that people in desperate situations do stupid things and they are getting desperate to remove our ability to overthrow them.

[Joshua01]

I honestly think they are surprised that after all the "mass killings" we haven't budged an inch on their stupid gun control attempts. Even in Connecticut where they implemented a gun registration process for "assault weapons" they got less than 1/10 of 1% to even register their guns. Most of those guys according to the state are now "felons" but since there were so many, and so many "unregistered" weapons in the hands of the "ignorant masses" they have virtually no way to enforce their moronic registration law.

The down side is, is that people in desperate situations do stupid things and they are getting desperate to remove our ability to overthrow them.

Desperation is a two way street

[mick silver]

they need us there to fucking lazy to work

[cheka.]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2016/10/28/how-globalism-became-the-boogeyman-of-2016/

How ‘globalism’ became Trump’s boogeyman of 2016

By Ishaan Tharoor October 28

“We will no longer surrender this country, or its people, to the false song of globalism.”

That was then-Republican presidential candidate — now nominee — Donald Trump, delivering his first full speech on foreign policy in April. The address latched on to a theme that Trump has voice repeatedly in the months and weeks since. It is the specter looming above whenever he grandstands over the dangers of globalization, the perfidy of jet-setting elites and the pitfalls of multiculturalism. The “nation-state,” not the international order, Trump declared in April, was “the true foundation for happiness and harmony.”

No candidate in the election cycle had made such a direct nationalist clarion call: By denouncing the “false song of globalism,” Trump threw down the gauntlet. Here was the right-wing sovereigntist, championing America First. His opponent, Hillary Clinton, was the “globalist" -- a politician, he argues, in thrall to interests beyond the nation's borders and eager to let the alien hordes within them.

For a number of years, the term “globalism” or “globalist” has been bandied about the fringes of American political discourse as a catchall phrase for a host of perceived evils: The collusion of international finance with Washington insiders, the anti-national agendas of multinational corporations and conglomerates, the indifference of “coastal elites” to the concerns of ordinary folks in the hinterland.

“Globalism” didn't always carry this valence. In most contexts, “globalization” has been the more loaded, charged word — and the prompt for outraged left-wing protests at summits of international power-brokers for the past two decades.

Harvard political scientist Joseph Nye laid out the distinction between the terms in 2002.

Globalism, at its core, seeks to describe and explain nothing more than a world which is characterized by networks of connections that span multi-continental distances. It attempts to understand all the interconnections of the modern world — and to highlight patterns that underlie (and explain) them. In contrast, globalization refers to the increase or decline in the degree of globalism. It focuses on the forces, the dynamism or speed of these changes. In short, consider globalism as the underlying basic network, while globalization refers to the dynamic shrinking of distance on a large scale.

But in 2016, the “underlying basic network" -- the simple fact of the world's interconnectedness — seems to have come under attack. It's been fueled by American conspiracy mongers on the far-right, such as Alex Jones of the Infowars website, who has decried “globalism” writ large for at least half a decade.

And it has been made mainstream by Trump, who, while tapping into a long-standing vein of nativism in conservative American politics, has also cloaked his campaign in the rhetoric of right-wing European populism.

“We literally have lost our sovereignty, lost our borders, lost our ability to regulate,” intoned Nigel Farage, a leader of Britain's xenophobic United Kingdom Independence Party, on the floor of the European parliament in June. “The problem you’ve got in the U.S. is illegal immigration. Our problem is legal immigration to half a billion people.”

Farage got his way this year: He was one of the champions of the pro-Brexit movement in Britain, which won a shock referendum in June when Britain voted by a narrow margin to quit the European Union. Trump hailed the referendum as “a great thing” and has gone on to liken himself to “Mr. Brexit.”

As other pro-Brexit figures backed away from the mess they created, Farage journeyed to America and campaigned on the trail with Trump. “Anything is possible if enough decent people want to fight the establishment,” Farage said at a rally in Mississippi in August.

In recent months, the Republican nominee's many surrogates in the media have also embraced this stance. Fox News host Sean Hannity railed against the globalism that embodied all of Trump's foes, including both the Democratic and Republican establishment. Irked by Trump's struggles in Utah, Lou Dobbs growled against the “globalist,” “Mormon mafia.” Trump ally and financier Roger Stone warned that “globalists” intend to start a new World War in the Middle East. Some Christian pastors even deemed globalism “demonic” and the “anti-Christ.”

Whatever the dubious and rather hysterical ideas underlying these claims, they feed into the broader message conveyed by Trump — that the system, as a whole, is rigged against his supporters.

“The problem is never the populist’s imperfect capacity to represent the people’s will; rather, it’s always the institutions that somehow produced the wrong outcomes,” writes Princeton academic Jan-Werner Müller in a new book on populism. “So even if they look properly democratic, there must be something going on behind the scenes that allows corrupt elites to continue to betray the people. Conspiracy theories are thus not a curious addition to populist rhetoric; they are rooted in and emerge from the very logic of populism itself.”

To be sure, disquiet about the forces of globalization and growing economic inequality within societies is not unique to the American right-wing. It animated Bernie Sanders's campaign on the left and will have to be reckoned with no matter who wins the election next month.

“I think we haven’t organized ourselves for the 21st century globalization,” Clinton admitted in an interview with the New Yorker's George Packer.

In a somewhat desperate plea, the conservative Federalist website urged Sanders voters to choose Trump and reject “dynastic globalism.” But the idea of “globalism" -- as it has been invoked by Trump and his backers — isn't simply an economic critique. As many now have already noted, the antiglobalist messaging of Trump's supporters in social media and on right-wing talk shows echoes a very dark past.

Trump's denunciation of a cabal of international bankers, his campaign's rejection of cosmopolitanism and multiculturalism, and his supporters' invocation of Nazi-era vocabulary to attack the media borrow from the language of an earlier era of fascism and have drawn charges of anti-Semitism.

“The conspiracy theories Trump has been talking up recently play on long-standing tropes used against Jews for decades or even centuries, and the echoes are unmistakable for many of Trump’s alt-right followers and for Jews who are familiar with the history of anti-Semitism,” writes Cheryl Greenberg, professor of history at Trinity College.

She goes on: “Whether Trump is intentional about spreading anti-Semitism is, of course, largely beside the point. Like his more overt expressions of racism, sexism and Islamophobia, Trump’s anti-Semitic comments have made such conversation acceptable again.”

And it's almost certain that, no matter the victor on Nov. 8, the scaremongering over the “globalist” menace will continue.

[cheka.]

http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/10/14/trump-anti-globalism-and-the-anti-semitism-slur/

October 14, 2016

Trump, Anti-Globalism and the Anti-Semitism Slur

by Jonathan Taylor

Tweet
Email

There are few tactics in contemporary politics more effective than labeling your opponent as an anti-Semite. So, as Donald Trump’s campaign continues to ramp up its radical populism, Trump’s attacks on global elites are increasingly being characterized as anti-Semitism. It’s as if every time Trump excoriates a Washington insider or international corporate power broker he really wants to say “Jew.” At least, that’s the charge by numerous members of the media, many of whom are Jewish themselves.

Just listen to Louis Mensch, ostensibly a conservative blogger for Heat St, whom Wikileaks just outed as a Hillary campaign helper: “Globalists is a racist code word for Jew because there are none. free trade between sovereign nations is not a wish to abolish the former.” By Mensch’s convoluted logic, since globalists don’t want to completely destroy national sovereignty, they aren’t really globalists. Therefore when people say globalists, they must mean Jews.

Or let’s hear from the Republican campaign strategist and “Never Trump-er” Rick Wilson: “Globalist”…why don’t you just say “Jew” and get it over with?”

Then there’s Bret Stephens from the Wall Street Journal, who demanded conservative columnist Laura Ingraham be fired for using the term “globalist cabal.” “Globalist cabal” is an anti-Semitic dog whistle of the first order. Fox News should act,” Stephens insisted.

And Louis Mensch again: “”Globalists” is, like “zionists” or “zios” the new antisemitic code word for Jews”. Distressing news no doubt to anti-Zionist Jews and critics of Israel, who are used to being spuriously accused of anti-Semitism.

Then there’s neocon blowhard Jamie Kirchick’s response to an incoherent tweet by Paul Ryan challenger Paul Nehlen, about Ryan’s staffer Dan Senor “With globalist advisers like @DanSenor it’s no wonder @PRyan is to the left of @HillaryClinton on #TPP. “ To which Kirchick responded “Why don’t you just say “Jew?”” Senor is indeed Jewish, and is rumored to be the person who leaked the infamous Trump- Billy Bush “pussy” tape to the press.

One Is tempted to just quote Lewis Carroll: “When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.”

But perhaps we should take a step back and look at the words globalism and globalist themselves . Globalism is currently used mainly to describe economic and political globalization. The word first became popular in the 1940s to describe US policies of containment of the Soviet Union. “Globalist” refers more broadly to someone who favors “global capitalism” and to political leaders who strive to create a unified global economy. In its more political-economic sense, the word “globalist” refers to international institutions that intervene globally. The United Nations, World Bank, IMF, World Trade Organization, EU, OECD, G20 and World Economic Forum are examples of globalist institutions. Politicians and bureaucrats who favor these institutions and their ability to dictate terms to sovereign states are globalists. Essentially, we are talking about the majority of mainstream US politicians from both parties.

In its more conspiratorial sense the word globalist is applied to groups who are thought to attempt to create global policies secretly or behind the scenes. This would include groups such as the Trilateral Commission, the Bilderberg Group, the Council on Foreign Relations, or the people who put together global trade deals that override national laws, like the TPP.

In his speech of October 13, 2016, Donald Trump used the term globalist repeatedly, triggering accusations of anti-Semitism from media outlets such as Mother Jones and Raw Story. The ADL’s Jonathan Greenblatt tweeted his concern, mildly stated compared to the rampant Twitter hysteria, that “Trump should avoid rhetoric&tropes” that suggest anti-Jewish themes. But despite the media pile-on, Trump has been discussing globalism in his speeches for months. As Jill Stein and to a lesser extent Bernie Sanders represent the long-standing anti-globalization movement of the left, Trump represents the anti-globalization movement of the right. And there is significant overlap between the two, as opposition to the TPP demonstrates or to provocative militarism towards Russia demonstrates.

Back on April 27, in a speech on foreign policy, Trump stated: “We will no longer surrender this country or its people to the false song of globalism. The nation-state remains the true foundation for happiness and harmony.”

From his acceptance speech at the RNC: “The most important difference between our plan and that of our opponents, is that our plan will put America first. Americanism, not globalism, will be our credo.”

From a speech on jobs on June 28: “Today, we import nearly $800 billion more in goods than we export. This is not some natural disaster. It is politician-made disaster. It is the consequence of a leadership class that worships globalism over Americanism.”

Trump appeals to economic nationalist policies, calling for more advantageous trade deals and hinting at protectionism. On foreign policy he advocates for less interventionism and military policy that is primarily defensive and in service of clear US national interests. He questions the patriotism of US elites by implying they serve some other power than the American people. That these ideas are appealing is not surprising in a country in which 70% of all households have less than $1000 in savings.

But are these policies anti-Semitic? Trump, whose daughter Ivanka is a Jewish convert married to an Orthodox Jewish husband who is a top Trump campaign advisor, seems an unlikely Jew hater, but the mainstream Hillary-loving press has been insisting he is Hitler throughout the campaign (odd since they also accusing him of being controlled by Russia. A new Molotov-Ribbentrop pact?) As the election looms the media are busy cranking up Jewish paranoia to 11. As the unflappably cool Matthew Iglesias surmises. “My guess is that in a Trump administration angry mobs will beat and murder Jews and people of color with impunity.”

In the wake of Trump’s October 13 speech, reporter Travis Gettys informed his readers that Trump’s very reference to international banks at all was anti-Semitic. His article for Raw Story was just a series of breathlessly fearmongering tweets. If Trump attacking bankers inspires such fear and loathing one hesitates to guess what Gettys must think of Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders, let alone bankster critics like Michael Hudson or David Graeber. Clearly goose-stepping brownshirts all.

Tactically speaking, the primary purpose of an accusation of anti-Semitism is to end debate. So if someone says “globalist is a code word for Jews”, or “blaming international banks for economic problems is anti-Semitic”, the function of this is to ensure that globalists and international banks cannot be blamed. It’s as if someone responded to the Occupy movement that “the 1%” is a codeword for Jews, so we should stop talking about wealth disparity.” The ramifications are obvious – leave the global elites out of this campaign or you’re a Jew-hating bigot and by the way here comes the ADL.

Second, by making this association, these supposed defenders of the Jews are in fact the ones at risk of fostering anti-Semitism. If “globalists” are conflated with Jews by Jews, then doesn’t that means that globalists ARE Jews? If “international bankers” is a cover for anti-Semitism, than by simple deduction most international bankers must be Jewish! The mind reels at the notion that suggesting these ideas is some sort of push-back against the actual anti-Semitism found among those who discuss “the Jewish Question” on the alt-right. And of course the alt-right trolls read these tweets, chuckle and say they knew it all along.

For those sitting on the sidelines, a logical response to these accusations of anti-Semitism is to start wondering about just exactly how Jewish the global elites really are. Of course, this is way beyond anything Trump is asking his supporters to do. Trump does not “name the Jew” as segments of the alt-right wish he did. Given his prominent position in globalist networks of power, Trump knows that while Jews are disproportionately represented that doesn’t mean that the global elite itself is predominantly Jewish. However Trump has singled out a couple of Jews in recent speeches: George Soros, and Sidney Blumenthal. Soros, as an extraordinarily wealthy financer and speculator who also funds an enormous amount of liberal and dare I say globalist causes around the world has long been a subject of attention on the far right. Blumenthal is less important, as a prominent Clinton advisor and Libya plotter who makes cameo appearances in Wikileaks. But naming a couple of prominent Jews associated with Hillary is hardly reading the Protocols of the Elders of Zion to the SS. Of course it is possible that Trump has some antipathy towards Jews, but far more likely that his actual beef is with globalists whose policies he is opposed to and whom are doing their damnedest to try to prevent him from becoming president.

Anti-Semitism is frequently used to silence people from saying the things they want or need to say. Trump needs to make his case for economic populism and an essentially paleoconservative foreign policy by depicting his opponents as the enemy. When the enemy appears to be an octopus-like conglomeration of career politicians like the Clintons, Wall Street bankers, wealthy .. uh… globalists like George Soros, oligarchs with media empires like Carlos Slim and Jeff Bezos, Trump needs to affix a label to them. He does use “special interests” but the term is ambiguous and there are special interests on Trump’s side as well. So Trump must name his enemy, and globalist is the word that fits best.

Trump’s Jewish attackers want to pretend that Trump is an anti-Semite and all of his attacks on globalist institutions or individuals is a personal attack on Jews. That’s preposterous, and projection. Trump’s Jewish attackers don’t want to admit their Jewish privilege. We Jews (yes, I’m one) are the wealthiest religious group in America and the second richest ethnic group behind Indian-Americans. For our tiny size, we are by far the most politically influential. The worlds of finance, media, journalism and law are home to extremely disproportionately high numbers of Jews. Leading globalist institutions like the World Bank, IMF, and WTO have high numbers of Jewish executives and staffers, as do organizations such as the Council on Foreign Relations, which one informal estimate claims is around 50% Jewish. Half of the US’s billionaires are Jewish. Jewish donors play an enormous role in funding Hillary Clinton’s campaign. The normally Republican and predominantly Jewish neoconservatives have thrown their support behind Hillary. None of this is evidence of conspiracy. Jews are overrepresented in a many other fields as well, such as mathematics, physics, medicine, philosophy, etc. Jews like to argue with each other and with gentiles, and anybody positing a unified Jewish perspective on any issue has obviously never had Shabbat dinner with a typical Jewish extended family. But claims that Jews are using their disproportionate wealth and influence to support Hillary Clinton are, in fact, true.

Bringing up anti-Semitism then just reminds people of how much influence and power Jews have. Casually hurling charges of anti-Semitism at critics of globalism is incredibly ill-advised and unhelpful. Trump’s critique of globalism, global elite corruption, and the role of bankers in global affairs is not anti-Semitic but the people who allege that it is are the ones who actually foster anti-Semitism, while simultaneously protecting globalism and globalist institutions from critique. Anti-Semitism is on the rise in some parts of the alt-right. There’s no need to make it worse by shaming people who criticize global elites.

Join the debate on Facebook

Jonathan Taylor is a Professor in the Geography Department at California State University, Fullerton.

[Joshua01]

Soon...it IS da Jews after all!!!

[keehah]

Some sections from a longer article on DC politics and Rhodes Scholars and associated Council on Foreign Relations

unlimitedhangout.com: The Rhodes Scholars Guiding Biden’s Presidency (https://unlimitedhangout.com/2022/03/investigative-reports/the-rhodes-scholars-guiding-bidens-presidency/)
While the WEF’s Young Global Leader program has recently become infamous, it follows the model of a much older program and think tank established with the ill-begotten gains of Cecil Rhodes.

MARCH 26, 2022

...Videos of Klaus Schwab bragging that Young Leaders have been positioned across the governments of Canada, Argentina, Europe and beyond are now being posted across social media platforms on a daily basis, confirming the suspicions of many that the World Economic Forum is not a benign business networking operation, as it has tried to project for the credulous. Rather, it is something much darker and insidious...

Just a tiny sampling of the prominent figures who have been processed and installed into positions of influence to advance the WEF globalist agenda over the past 30 years include Angela Merkel, Nicholas Sarkozy, Emmanuel Macron, Tony Blair, Mark Zuckerberg, José Manuel Barroso, Bill Gates, Chrystia Freeland, Pete Buttigieg, Jacinda Arden (PM New Zealand), Jack Ma (Ali Baba founder), Larry Fink (Blackrock CEO), Larry Page (Google founder), Lynn Forrester de Rothschild (Council for Inclusive Capitalism founder), Jimmy Wales (Wikipedia founder), Peter Thiel (Paypal founder), Leonardo Di Caprio (tool), Richard Branson (Virgin Records CEO), Jeff Bezos (Amazon founder), Stephan Bancel (Moderna CEO), Pierre Omidyar (Ebay co-founder), Alizia Garza (co-founder BLM), Jonathan Soros (son of sociopath) and, according the Schwab, himself “half the Canadian Cabinet” under Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

As important as it is to hold this disturbing fact in mind, it is even more important not to lose sight of the deeper historical forces at play and the older institutional practice of talent searching young blood upon which the YGL Program is based.

Just as Klaus Schwab was never his own man, having been trained by his mentors Maurice Strong (co-founder of the WEF) [1] and his Harvard mentor Henry Kissinger, so too were Klaus’ Young Leaders merely a modern version of an older practice that has been at play for over 114 years. This older institution is the Rhodes Scholarship system and the associated Round Table Movement, which created both Chatham House in 1919 and its American branch, dubbed “The Council on Foreign Relations,” in 1921.

[1] Klaus Schwab delivered the following remarks (https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2015/11/maurice-strong-an-appreciation) upon Strong’s 2015 death saying: “He [Strong] was my mentor since the creation of the Forum: a great friend; an indispensable advisor; and, for many years, a member of our Foundation Board. Without him, the Forum would not have achieved its present significance.”

This program has been incredibly influential and has also generated immense damage over the last century. Thousands of young Americans have been processed through the halls of Oxford since its founding who are then re-inserted back into their native land with a religious-like zeal to advance an agenda, the full scope of which very few of them truly comprehend.

The Example of Biden’s Cabinet

During the first year of the Biden administration, swarms of Oxford-trained Rhodes Scholars were swept into dominant positions of power across America’s domestic and foreign policy landscape.

The hegemony of the Council on Foreign Relations as a major top-down planning center for the Rules-Based International Order has also been firmly re-established after having been relegated to a back seat during the four year period of Donald Trump’s presidency. Trump’s term was referred to by CFR President Richard Haass as “the aberration”. Haass himself is a Rhodes Scholar, having graduated from Oxford’s Oberlin College in 1978.

The CFR and the Rhodes Scholarship program are simply two sides of the same process that have acted as a key pillar to the establishment of fifth column operations within the USA, and the Trans Atlantic Community more generally, during the past century. Both the CFR and the Rhodes Scholarship were established by the ill-begotten fortunes of Cecil Rhodes...

Clinton Opens the Floodgates

With Bill Clinton’s 1992 presidential victory, Rhodes Scholars like Strobe Talbott (Assistant Secretary of State and co-architect of Perestroika) and Robert Reich (Secretary of Labor), were joined by “Rhodies” Ira Magaziner, Derek Shearer (Senior Economic Advisors), Susan Rice (Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs), Kevin Thurme (Health and Human Services Chief of Staff), George Stephanopoulos (Communications Director), Richard Celeste (Ambassador to India) and dozens of other Rhodes Scholars. These individuals were funneled into positions of influence that aimed to oversee the “end of history”, as celebrated by neocon thinker Francis Fukuyama, as the Soviet Union disintegrated.

While some Rhodies remained in positions of power during the period of the presidency of George W. Bush, the Rhodes Hives again enjoyed vast policy-shaping influence under the Obama-age where the architecture for global governance was being built on the wreckage of troublesome nation states like Libya, Syria and Ukraine.

Despite the set back caused by Trump, whose victory interfered with Hillary Clinton’s coronation, Rhodies are stubborn creatures, if nothing else. It was later revealed in 2020 (https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2020/08/10/the-brookings-hand-behind-russiagate-points-back-to-rhodes-trust-coup-on-america/) that both Talbott and Rice were at the heart of Russiagate.

While still serving as Brookings Institute President in 2015-17, it was Talbott who interfaced with MI6’s Sir Richard Dearlove and Christopher Steele (https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2020/08/10/the-brookings-hand-behind-russiagate-points-back-to-rhodes-trust-coup-on-america/) in the months before the elections by cooking up and circulating the “dodgy dossier”. It was Rice who was revealed to be at the center (https://www.politico.com/story/2017/04/susan-rice-flynn-unmasking-236884) of the “unmasking” entrapment operation that targeted Michael Flynn in January 2017.

It would be the height of folly to presume, as some commentators have done, that Talbott’s role in this operation indicates an American guiding hand in the effort to undo the 2016 elections. Yet, the fact is that Talbott’s entire life and world outlook have been shaped by British Imperial principles that are programmed into the minds of most Rhodes Scholars like himself.

As Jeremy Kuzmarov demonstrates in his recent essay published in Covert Action Magazine (https://covertactionmagazine.com/2022/01/03/there-is-absolutely-no-reason-in-the-world-to-believe-that-bill-clinton-is-a-cia-asset-except-for-all-the-evidence/), both Talbott and his Oxford roommate Bill Clinton had likely been recruited to the CIA long before receiving their scholarships. Kuzmarov also demonstrates that Bill Clinton played a key role smuggling Khrushchev’s memoir out of Russia during a “research” expedition to Moscow. Clinton’s role in this operation gives new meaning to the role Talbott played in translating that memoir into English as part of a much larger Anglo-American intelligence operation designed to revise Soviet history.

It was also during his time at Oxford that young Talbott adopted a near-religious commitment to a post-nation state world order.

Upon his return to America, Talbott was shepherded into a prominent role in the western propaganda bureau, serving as a leading editor of Time Magazine. It was during the end of this phase of his career that the soon-to-be Assistant Secretary of State outlined his manifesto for the New World Order in a July 20 1992 article entitled “The Birth of a Global Nation” (https://www.economicsvoodoo.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/1992-07-20-Strobe-Talbott-The-Birth-of-the-Global-Nation_Time-Magazine-.pdf).

In that article, Talbott stated:

“All countries are basically social arrangements…No matter how permanent or even sacred they may seem at any one time, in fact they are all artificial and temporary…Perhaps national sovereignty wasn’t such a great idea after all….But it has taken the events in our own wondrous and terrible century to clinch the case for world government.”

Within his 1992 manifesto, Talbott describes NATO as “history’s most ambitious, enduring and successful exercise in collective security” and then celebrates the International Monetary Fund. Talbott said “the free world formed multilateral financial institutions that depend on member states’ willingness to give up a degree of national sovereignty. The International Monetary Fund can virtually dictate fiscal policies, even including how much tax a government should levy on its citizens.”

Forecasting the Blair-Cheney “Responsibility to Protect” protocol which would soon justify the humanitarian bombings of Kosovo, Iraq, Libya and Syria, Talbott championed the destruction of national sovereignty made possible by the invasion of Kuwait in 1991, saying “the internal affairs of a nation used to be off limits to the world community. But the principle of ‘humanitarian intervention is gaining acceptance.”

During the entire Clinton Presidency, Talbott ensured that his utopian beliefs would not remain ink on paper, but be put swiftly into action, interfacing closely with Soros’ Open Society Foundations and overseeing the Shock Therapy of Russia during the 1990s...

Today’s battle between the opposing paradigms of the multipolar alliance led by Russia and China on the one hand vs the unipolarist/post-nation state worldview on the other has everything to do with these longer forces of history. The only way to comprehend the ideologies pushing the world towards a new iron curtain today, and managing international fifth columns across the many nations of the world is by recognizing this higher reality.
____________________________________________

newsweek.com: Davos: The Left Didn't Eat the Rich. The Rich Ate the Left. (https://www.newsweek.com/davos-left-didnt-eat-rich-rich-ate-left-opinion-1710559)
5/27/22

[keehah]

unz.com: Significance of Empire vs Alliance: Jewish-Controlled US Empire & EU Puppets in Conflict with Alliance of Sovereign Nations, Esp. Russia, China, & Iran (https://www.unz.com/jfreud/significance-of-empire-vs-alliance-jewish-controlled-us-empire-eu-puppets-in-conflict-with-alliance-of-sovereign-nations-esp-russia-china-iran/)
JUNE 2, 2022

[keehah]

unlimitedhangout.com: Dr. Klaus Schwab or: How the CFR Taught Me to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb (https://unlimitedhangout.com/2022/03/investigative-reports/dr-klaus-schwab-or-how-the-cfr-taught-me-to-stop-worrying-and-love-the-bomb/)
MARCH 10, 2022
Is Klaus Schwab the real brains behind the formation of the World Economic Forum? What are we to make of the CIA involvement in the seminar Kissinger used to recruit Schwab? Were the powers that lurk behind organisations like the CFR the real founders of the globalist policy making organisation? Was the World Economic Forum meant to simply unite Europe? Or was it then actually meant to go on to unite Europe with America, followed by the remaining superstates, into a New World Order designed by powerful CFR grandees like Kissinger, Khan and Galbraith?

These three powerful men each saw in Schwab a reflection of their own intellectual desires...

Schwab has become more than just a technocrat. He has been very vocal on his intention to fuse his physical and biological identities with future technology. He has become a living caricature of an evil bond-like villain, conducting secretive meetings with the elites, high up in the mountain-top chalets of Switzerland. I do not think that the image we have of Schwab is an accident. In the postwar years, something very unique happened in Western culture, when the government began using mainstream media as a tool to target the public with military grade psychological operations. The ruling Establishment would discover that marrying the drama of conflict scenarios with media such as film would be extremely useful, almost akin to creating self-propagating propaganda in some cases. Films like Stanley Kubrick’s Dr Strangelove were fantastic vehicles for people to understand the absurdity of thermonuclear disaster scenario planning.

If people perceive you as an all powerful evil villain then you may not gain the support of the common man, but you will gain the attention from those who seek power and wealth, or, how Klaus Schwab would refer to them, the “stakeholders” in society. This is very important to understand – the projection of extreme wealth and power will attract and bring the “stakeholders” of society to the World Economic Forum’s table. With those “stakeholders” on board, Klaus Schwab’s main ideological product, “stakeholder capitalism”, will see the transfer of power away from true democratic processes and onto a system of governance by a small preselected leadership group, who will be trained to continue the agenda set for them by the previous generation, as predicted by Herman Kahn. They will hold all the cards, whilst the common people will be left with just illusory pseudo-democratic processes, poverty, and constant absurd psychological operations to distract us all constantly...

Our current geopolitical situation is seemingly regressing back towards the East vs West dynamic of the Cold War era. Again, with recent events in Ukraine, the mainstream media is regurgitating nuclear talking points which are completely paralleled to those of 60 to 70 years ago. I believe that there is a very obvious reason for our return to Cold War rhetoric – it’s a very obvious sign that Klaus Schwab and his backers are out of ideas. They appear to be returning to a geopolitical paradigm in which they feel safer and, most importantly, which will cause mass fear of thermonuclear war. This rinse and repeat cycle will always happen once an ideological movement is running out of original ideas...

As Schwab reaches the end of his life, he appears to be desperate to push forward a radical futurist agenda with the obvious potential for global disaster. I believe that the World Economic Forum is reaching its maximum level of expansion before its inevitable collapse, because eventually those people who love their own national identities will stand up against the immediate threat to their specific cultures and they will fight back against the globalist rule. Quite simply, you cannot make everyone a globalist, no matter how much brainwashing is applied. There is a natural contradiction between national freedom and globalist rule, which make the two completely incompatible.

[keehah]

A good article on the CIA's pre-Henry Kissinger and Klaus Schwab activity before the latest version as World Economic Forum.


unlimitedhangout.com: Unauthorized History of the WEF’s Young Global Leaders Program (https://unlimitedhangout.com/2022/08/investigative-reports/the-kissinger-continuum-the-unauthorized-history-of-the-wefs-young-global-leaders-program/)
AUGUST 29, 2022
The World Economic Forum’s Young Global Leaders program, Klaus Schwab’s supposed brainchild, is actually an almost exact replica of Henry Kissinger’s International Seminar that was originally run out of Harvard and was funded by the CIA. In this article, Johnny Vedmore investigates the people behind Kissinger’s International Seminar, the CIA conduits which funded the program, and Kissinger’s key role in the creation of the WEF’s Young Global Leaders program itself.

The World Economic Forum’s Young Global Leaders (YGL) initiative has been responsible for seeding many of the ruling elite into positions of power and influence within the worlds of business, civil society and, most importantly, politics. The fall of the Soviet Union soon became the apparent catalyst for the creation of the Global Leaders for Tomorrow program, which was the precursor to the Young Global Leaders initiative over a decade later.

However, the supposed mastermind of the project, the WEF’s lifetime leader Klaus Schwab, had himself already been helped into his own influential position by a very similar program run out of Harvard University that was heavily funded by the American Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). The Harvard initiative in question, often referred to as Henry Kissinger’s International Seminar, was one of several programs set up by senior members of organizations such as the Council on Foreign Relations and the newly created CIA. In fact, during the post-World War II era, the United States was proactively creating many such programs with the intention of grooming potential young foreign leaders and installing them into positions of power. The main motive behind the establishment of these programs was ostensibly to combat and prevent communist infiltration of foreign states while also assuring that future global leaders would be amenable to US interests.

Originally, the United States created these secretive youth organizations with the aim of targetting potential future European leadership candidates. Yet, soon, no country in the world would be safe from possible CIA-sponsored political infiltration. In this article, we will examine one of the front organizations which used vast amounts of CIA money to fund various Harvard projects including Kissinger’s International Seminar. We will learn who the people were who created these funding platforms, and we’ll also look at other such educational initiatives, some still in existence today, which have helped American intelligence infiltrate governments worldwide.

In 1967, it was Harvard’s own Humphrey Doermann (https://nyti.ms/3oCZMk7) who exposed that certain Harvard Summer School courses and initiatives were actually being funded via CIA conduits. Even though almost a decade of funding throughout the 1950s remained undeclared, it was revealed that, between 1960 and 1966, Kissinger’s International Seminar received funding from three CIA conduits: The Asian Foundation (https://www.muckrock.com/news/archives/2017/nov/02/taf-1/), The Farfield Foundation (https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Farfield_Foundation), and The American Friend’s of the Middle East, the latter being one of the more well-known, influential and successful CIA conduits of the era.

The CIA funded Harvard-based International Seminar, and the conduits which the Central Intelligence Agency used to supply the forum with the necessary funds to run the program, are of great historical significance.

The American Friends of the Middle East (AFME) (https://wikimili.com/en/American_Friends_of_the_Middle_East) was not just a simple front organization used to funnel secret CIA money into their various projects, in fact, there were some very big names attached to this prominent post-war organization. The AFME was considered to be an “international educational organization” and was formed the same year that Henry Kissinger launched the International Seminar at Harvard, in 1951. There were 27 men and women who made up the AFME, which was led by Kermit “Kim” Roosevelt, Jr., the grandson of former-American President Theodore Roosevelt. The CIA had been formed in 1947 from what was originally the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) and Kermit Roosevelt Jr. was extremely influential in the early years of both organizations.

Kermit Roosevelt had been recruited by the mastermind behind the OSS, General William Joseph “Wild Bill” Donovan (https://www.nps.gov/articles/wild-bill-donovan-and-the-origins-of-the-oss.htm), in 1941 and he was soon placed into the newly-created Office of the Co-ordinator of Information— the precursor to the OSS—as a special assistant to Dean Acheson (https://www.britannica.com/biography/Dean-Acheson). Working out of the State Department, Acheson, who was then Assistant Secretary of State, had been tasked during World War II with implementing President Franklin Roosevelt’s policy of undermining Axis powers while at the same time supplying economic aid to Great Britain....


The World Economic Forum has spawned many globalist-aligned heads of states, cabinet ministers, business leaders, entrepreneurs and other powerful actors, through their Global Leaders for Tomorrow and Young Global Leaders initiatives. Schwab has even spoken openly on how his organization has gone on to “penetrate the cabinets” of supposedly sovereign states, and we should not be naive, as he has been planning on doing exactly this for at least three decades. However, it isn’t the thousands of participants who have completed these programs who we should be most concerned about. Our real concern should be with the billions of democratic voters who have been tricked into believing that any of the leaders produced by either Schwab or Kissinger have their best interests at heart.

______________________________________________

Related WEF threads:

http://gold-silver.us/forum/showthread.php?103348-The-Great-Reset
http://gold-silver.us/forum/showthread.php?104679-Klaus-Schwabb-s-Puppets-Naming-Names
http://gold-silver.us/forum/showthread.php?102899-klaus-schwab-and-his-great-fascist-reset-Adolf-II