Join Our Members List For Exclusive Reports




Please leave this field empty.

This is the interview I just did with authors, Elizabeth Gould and Paul Fitzgerald, who have written a definitive 4-part article on the origins and the  history of the Neocon movement. The influence of the Neoconservatives has been catastrophic to the American government – and to much of the world, yet as they point out, it never seems to end. The authors describe it as an elitist cult; a rabid ideology which doesn’t rely on facts to justify itself.

Senator J. William Fulbright identified the Neocons’ irrational system for making endless war in Vietnam 45 years ago, in a New Yorker article titled Reflections in Thrall to Fear: “Cold War psychology is the totally illogical transfer of the burden of proof from those who make charges to those who question them”, leading to “The ultimate illogic: war is the course of prudence and sobriety until the case for peace is proved under impossible rules of evidence [or never] – or until the enemy surrenders. Rational men cannot deal with each other on this basis…But these were not rational men and their need to further their irrational quest only increased with the loss of the Vietnam War.”

This same ideology drove the failed War in Iraq – and now, they’re at it again, with their foolhardy saber-rattling towards Russia.

The birth of the Neocon movement grew out of what had previously been known within the Eastern Establishment as “Team B”, in which official policies were tested by “competitive analysis”. The first Team B was created by George H. W. Bush, while he was Director of the CIA. This brought together very unlikely bedfellows, such as the ex-Trotskyite, James Burnham and Right Wing business interests, both of whom lobbied heavily for big military budgets, advanced weapons systems and aggressive action to confront Soviet Communism.

This Team B/Neocon doomsday cult managed to weather the defeat of the Vietnam War and their non-fact-based analyses continue to maintain a stranglehold on US policy.

James Burnham’s nihilist, elitist vision was criticized by George Orwell in his 1946 essay, Second Thoughts on James Burnham, in which he wrote, “What Burnham is mainly concerned to show [in the latter’s book, The Machiavellians] is that a democratic society has never existed and, so far as we can see, never will exist. Society is of its nature oligarchical, and the power of the oligarchy always rests upon force and fraud… Power can sometimes be won and maintained without violence, but never without fraud.” In fact, George Orwell’s classic book, 1984 was based on Burnham’s vision of the coming totalitarian state, which he described as “A new kind of society, neither Capitalist nor Socialist, and probably based upon slavery.”

There are many well-known godfathers of the Neoconservative agenda of “Endless War”, the guiding principle of America’s foreign policymakers today but Gould and Fitzgerald identify James Burnham as by far its most important figure, although he is little-known today.

Burnham was born in Chicago, the son of an English immigrant father. He attended Princeton University and later Oxford University’s Balliol College. He briefly became a close advisor to Communist revolutionary Leon Trotsky, from whom he learned the tactics and strategies of infiltration, political subversion and dirty tricks. Gould and Fitzgerald note that the Right Wing Neocon cult of “Endless War” is ironically rooted in Trotsky’s permanent “Communist Revolution” and they describe how James Burnham helped to turn this into the permanent battle plan for a global Anglo-American empire. They write, “All that was needed to complete Burnham’s dialectic was a permanent enemy and that would require a sophisticated psychological campaign to keep the hatred of Russia alive for generations.”

In 1941, Burnham renounced his allegiance to Trotsky and Marxist idealism and he moved towards a cruel realism, with his belief in the inevitable failure of democracy and the rise of the oligarch. During the following years, he wrote several books and memos, predicting the rise of a technocratic elite. By 1947, Burnham’s transformation from Communist radical to New World Order American Conservative was complete, landing him smack into the loving arms of America’s Right Wing defense establishment during and after World War II.

In my own writings, I’ve noted that the use of the word “Freedom” by the US Government, whether it be “Freedom Fries”, “Operation Iraqi Freedom” or “They hate us for our freedom,” has completely mangled the significance of this F-word, certainly from a Constitutional perspective. Gould and Fitzgerald trace the bastardization of this word to James Burnham:

“Burnham’s Freedom only applied to those intellectuals (the Machiavellians) willing to tell people the hard truth about the unpopular political realities they faced. These were the realities that would usher in a brave new world of the managerial class who would set about denying Americans the very Democracy they thought they already owned. As Orwell observed about Burnham’s Machiavellian beliefs, in his 1946 Second Thoughts, ‘Power can sometimes be won or maintained without violence, but never without fraud, because it is necessary to use the masses.’”

With the CIA’s 1950 founding of the Congress for Cultural Freedom (CCF), Gould and Fitzgerald write, “By its own admission, the CIA’s strategy of promoting the non-Communist Left would become the theoretical foundation of the Agency’s political operations against Communism over the next two decades.”

Today, it appears that this strategy has been a smashing success, where we see the so-called Left in the US playing the role of fulminating, pro-Establishment Statists, a behavior formerly relegated to the Right. Never, in my wildest dreams would I have imagined the “tolerant Left” behaving like an army of Phyllis Schlaflys!

Prior to the catastrophe that was the Vietnam War, the Right was the establishment. The factual defeat of the ideals which drove this war was instrumental to the rise of the 1960s Counterculture movement, which was an even bigger disaster for the Neocons than losing the war. The Counterculture needed to be co-opted by any means necessary and I believe this has been successfully achieved.

Gould and Fitzgerald write that, “CIA’s control over the non-Communist Left and the West’s ‘free’ intellectuals [enabled] the CIA to secretly disenfranchise Europeans and Americans from their own political culture in such a way they would never really know it.”

Gould and Fitzgerald cite historian Christopher Lasch, who wrote in 1969 of the CIA’s co-optation of the American Left: “The modern state… is an engine of propaganda, alternately manufacturing crises and claiming to be the only instrument that can effectively deal with them. This propaganda, in order to be successful, demands the cooperation of writers, teachers, and artists, not as paid propagandists or state-censored time-servers but as ‘free’ intellectuals capable of policing their own jurisdictions and of enforcing acceptable standards of responsibility within the various intellectual professions.”

We see this very much today, in the Late Night comedy of Stephen Colbert, Trevor Noah and SNL, the staff writers of which are largely hand-picked from the Harvard Lampoon, where young comedians are trained in a particular brand of comedy that deftly implants a fascist philosophy of extreme elitism and which fuses the ideals of the old Trotskyist left together with those of the right-wing Anglo-American elite, aka the Deep State.

The product of this fusion is called “Neoconservatism” – or its sneaky twin, “Neoliberalism”. The overt mission of this ideology is to roll back Russian influence everywhere. The covert mission is to reassert British cultural dominance over the Anglo-American Empire, maintained through propaganda. Traditionally, comedy has been used as a form of social and political criticism. Today, it cows the hapless consumer into submission to the hegemony.

Gould and Fitzgerald then inform us about the secret Information Research Department of the British and Commonwealth Foreign Office known as the IRD, which was funded by the CIA and served as a covert anti-Communist propaganda unit from 1946 until 1977. Gould and Fitzgerald cite Paul Lashmar and James Oliver, authors of Britain’s Secret Propaganda War, which describes how the IRD spread ceaseless disinformational propaganda (a mixture of lies and distorted facts) among top-ranking journalists working for major news agencies, including Reuters and the BBC and all other available channels. This was but one of many similar initiatives launched by the CIA’s Psychological Strategy Board, including Project Mockingbird and the abovementioned Congress for Cultural Freedom.

The mind is the ultimate battlefield. In my next talk with Gould and Fitzgerald, we will go into how the Deep State has designs on our dream life, in such figures as Robert Moss, a former assassin who now gives New Age workshops on “Active Dreaming.” (Incidentally, the New Age Movement was a CIA subproject of MK Ultra mind control programs). The soon-to-be-released 5G network will enable Virtual Reality, as predicted by Gould and Fitzgerald’s book, ‘The Voice: An Encrypted Monologue’, which takes the reader through the process of reclaiming one’s own narrative from the “noize” of unrelenting psychological warfare that saturates our environment.

The Voice

Alexandra Bruce

Contributed by

Contact

monsantiossssss
Alexandra Bruce

Alexandra Bruce

View all posts

20 comments

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  • Perhaps you are being a pragmatist in this piece, knowing certain words are toxic at least as far as a career in journalism goes. However I find it curious that the Neocon’s and the Brit’s Zionist /cryptoTalmudic connections are not even whispered. Nor are the connections between the money masters and permanent war, but I repeat myself…

    • First of all, this piece is about the early days, the foundation of Neoconservatism and what many might consider to be its “unlikely” roots, because we all associate Neoconservatism with Zionists, being that today’s movement is populated, I guess entirely by Zionists. I’m not sure that I can think of any Neocons who aren’t, to answer someone else’s question.

      However, it does not appear that Neoconservatism began that way. I am not a career journalist. I couldn’t get arrested to write for a mainstream venue but you are correct, if I’d harped about Zionism in this article, I would have been threatened with total ruin. Trust me, it’s happened before. The Brits are so used to being bashed, they’re not going to come after me for this little thing!

  • Its interesting to note the point raised about the British connection. I recall Karen Hudes saying that US taxes leaving America and being channeled through the City of London and then to the Vatican. I’ve walked around this area of London (incidentally it has its own sovereignty as does Vatican City) its a collection of very old 18th & 17th century streets, no evidence of extreme wealth. I was struck by how deserted it was, no cars parked in the street no people rushing around almost as though everything was underground!

    • Oops! I’ve just realised that what I said above is a bit absurd. Karen Hudes was talking about a particular part of the city of London that finances are being delivered to (I’ve just tried to find the article again)

    • Their articles received a lot of criticism about this on TheSaker.is

      The British were instrumental in creating the State of Israel and in fostering Zionism.

      Zionism would not be the force that it is today without the British. Liz & Paul talking about the unknown, “secret”, early history of Neoconservatism. Who’s ever heard of James Burnham? Not me.

      Paul does mention “Jews” in the first sentence he speaks in this interview, BTW.

  • oh thats y i hate geopolitics (set aside just global many blood sucking tics) but i like to call it geowarfare because that is all they are interested in trading is like barely even on the lvl at least it seems to me just look at amerika i dunno how it has changed under trump but like i have been saying he better have been cracking heads on his lil trip and he better crack some more heads when he gets back!! i was giving him may but we really need to see things going down now the french election is over where is the global currency reset? and how about some truth and arresting some bastards…that simple but yea the nations that want to or wanted to join up with the BRICS amreika is or was in over 140+ wars all over the world and it just so happens over 140+ nations want to or wanted to join up with the BRICS and end the AMERIKAN BULLSHIT this beast system known as THE UNITED STATES CORPORATION OF AMERIKA MUST END!!!!!!!!!!! FORRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR THE LAND OF THE SERPENTS AND THE HOME OF THE SLAVEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    END THE FED END THE SHIT DOLLAR STOP AMERIKA BEFORE ITS TOO LATE!!

  • George Orwell’s 1984 was supposed to be a warning, not a guide. Contary to the much ridiculed warnings from the alternative and conspiracy communities there is a steady drip drip towards total control. It is alarming how the masses are drawn into the pretence by putting a ring in their own nose without realising the halter is in the firm grip of secret governement.
    Most annoying is the blank stare you get from people when you try to explain things to those whose total perception and attitude is in the firm grip of The Mainstream Media. There are chinks of light who’s existance is indicated by the need create and use the ‘Fake News’ stick to beat us with.
    Protest does not work. It is met with demonisation, riot police, tear gas and kettling. The one lever we have is if millions were to totally black the products of certain corporations. These would be sanctions of the people. True democracy!

    • I agree the blank stare is annoying. But to be fair it takes time to wake up to the reality of things. People have to find out for themselves, you can help by pointing them in the right direction.

      • I showed my friend a photo I’d taken of an enormous u-shaped chemtrail above our hometown trying to show him that it was not normal behaviour for a passenger aircraft. He said ‘they’d probably forgotten something and gone back for it’ this friend had two college degrees!

    • I am “blacking” as you say all of the TV “comedy shows ” like Colbert and SNL as they are so transparently manipulative. I used to watch Letterman and he was at least fairly sophisticated in his mind manipulations. Colbert’s nearly transaparent sycophancy has totally turned me off.

      • I knew a lot of the guys who wrote for Letterman before they all went to start The Simpsons. Later, some went to King of the Hill. Letterman was the embodiment of the snarky style that I was referring to but as you say, it wasn’t so overtly propagandistic. John Stewart didn’t behave the way we see Stephen Colbert, Trevor Noah and John Oliver today (None of these are Harvard Lampoon people, but I’d be willing to bet that their writing staffs are). Stewart had a running series called “Mess O’Potamia” about the War in Iraq, which pilloried the horror of it while at the same time sanitizing it because this total horror show was the fodder for his humor, when he should have been jumping on his desk, demanding that it stop. South Park was a brutal send-up of American foibles. Their marionette action film, ‘Team America’ was maybe the funniest film, ever (also not Lampoon people).

  • It seems to me that we are all in a very long tunnel, I don’t think we will find the end of, at least, not without an open mind. Best wishes for almost all.

    • Absolutely. George W Bush, Dick Cheney, Condi Rice, Lindsey Graham, Hillary Clinton, John McCain, Tim Pawlenty, John Bolton, Marco Rubio, William Bennett, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, Jeane Kirkpatrick, Scooter Libby, Victor Davis Hanson, Douglas Murray….Obama, technically…

      • Actually I arrived at this conclusion on my own a long time ago and if I could do it so could anyone. One does not have to be brilliant, just curious and questioning, but if one soaks in front of television for six hours a day they will never discover anything worthwhile whatsoever.

        After discovering this and much more actually, I ran across two brilliant authors – E. Michael Jones and Michael A. Hoffman who confirmed my discoveries and fine tuned them. Both are Roman Catholics and there are some things I would disagree with Jones because of his biased RC view of history, nevertheless I’ve greedily scooped up all his lectures.

        People need to keep an open mind, because nobody knows everything and unless one is willing to change their minds, they will never learn much of anything, so I consider contrarian ideas if they are new to me. However re-plowing old weeds is a waste of time.

        There are competing groups for world dominion. They can be identified and there are not that many. All tolled you can count the ones that matter on your fingers and have fingers left over. To some degree, they are interlocking even where it seems illogical. Thieves make for strange bedfellows.

        The problem we have is most Americans are reactionary and they don’t like to get up off their arses until their seat gets too hot to tolerate.

detoxestrogen

Most Viewed Posts

 
 

Categories