Bob --- about the Rockefellers
You are a busy, but inaccurate reader. I am always impressed, when you post of your enthusiasm and credulity. I think you have much to contribute to an intelligent discussion, but you have an obligation to good taste to try and reduce the amount of sheer misinformation you transmit. I will try to limit my study of your fallacies to the first of your targets -- The Rockefellers.
Hypothesis I. Rockefellers control American politics. You have an obligation if you make this charge to produce some evidence. Your passage
"...CFR (Council on Foreign Relations) which was formed by the
Rockefellers has total sway in our government. They have been putting there people in government for most of this century. Most of the powerful non-elected officials are CFR,and the elected officials who don't go along can have a hard time getting elected as the CFR puts their power and money behind the other candidate. It's more common though to see both candidates pay homage to the CFR and then they contribute to both and leave them both alone to slug it out. It's win/win for the CFR because whoever wins in beholden to them. Our President's are especially vulnerable because the news media is controlled by the CFR. Nobody can run without first kissing David Rockefellers hand."
The first question this stuff raises is:
If the Rockefellers are so damned elitist, powerful, rich and full of ambitious politicians (Lawrence, Nelson, Jay) why do we end up with Presidents who come from rural and small-town failures and drunks like Reagan, Eisenhower, Clinton and Truman, shabby-gentile and lace-curtain losers like Wilson, Ford, and Nixon, "Babbitts and Bureaucrats" like McKinley, Taft, Coolidge, and Harlot, and wannabee petty aristocrats manque like the Roosevelts and Bush?
CFR has no significant Rockefeller influence in it. It was started, no doubt, with Rockefeller Foundation money, and maybe the brothers (John 3, David, Lawrence, and Nelson) put some of their combined eleemosynary (Rockefeller Brothers Foundation) to support it as well. The members and the magazine are the primary influences. CFR contributes no money to politics. People like Dean Rusk (who graduated from the same provincial high school as I attended and by family about as elite as a piece of corn bread), was a staff colonel to General Marshall in WWII, and taught college, wanted to establish an organization to sponsor discussion of foreign relations. Rusk was so obscure in 1965 when he was Secretary of State) that he was not even listed in the Webster's Biographical Dictionary of that date. Rockefeller Foundation had earlier chosen Rusk as its president. Someday, someone will take time off from quarreling on the internet to write the full biography of this remarkable man and the importance of the Rockefeller Foundation. In my opinion, without the RF and Rusk's leadership, billions of people would have starved to death in the last third of this century. Of course, some one might have caused Norman Borlag's (also unmentioned in the WBD) agricultural revolution, but Rockefeller (and Ford) Foundations actually did.
While you are accusing the Rockefellers of exploiting the world for greed and power, I see them working in a remarkably effective and economical way, to save the world from starvation and disease. True, Winthrop was governor of Arkansas, and has a private life that may have encouraged a local hayseed to pursue a randy political career. There may be a book there, too, but it needs research. I don't believe all the Rockefeller money was able to bring him to the attention of the power brokers. Then there's Nelson -- a politician whose monument is an extraordinary plaza in Albany, who, despite the fact that he was said to upright apparently to the very end, could never quite get to be president despite his wealth and connections. Nelson certainly financed, if he did not create, interest in modern art in the U.S. David, the scholar in the family, earned a Ph.D. in economics at the family university (UChi, which John I had created -- (and which revolutionized graduate education in the U.S.), and started to work his way up in one family (Chase) bank. One of his greatest achievements if founding the Tri-Lateral Commission which has provided endless entertainment for otherwise useless and unmotivated people like Pat Robinson. John III, the philanthropist brother, is one of the most underappreciated people in our history. Jay (John IV) his eldest son, following somewhat the example of his uncle Lawrence, worked as a community worker in West Virginia, and liked the State so much that he bought it. The working people of West Virginia, white and black, love this remarkable man who has done so much for them. I have an aphorism, source unknown, that 1. man is rarely so innocently engaged as when making money. I apply it in class to people like JDR I, Gates, and Carnegie. I try to show business students that making vast sums of money in our country requires (I believe) a deeply moral outlook by him who would be rich. Those who become really rich, I believe, only do so if they are decent and moral by their own standards. I can think no one in the history of the world who has in his whole life done as much for mankind as John D. Rockefeller. And he is not yet finished. His foundations -- his benefactions -- continue. I am an "act utilitarian" by philosophy, and the calculations involved are awesome. JDR is one of the few people who can withstand a utilitarian audit on his life. Of course, we must measure the impact of his crimes as well. I know there were many things wrong done by JDR, but in the balance of things, the ones that can be proved seem quite insigificant compared to the good he accomplished. Instead of making baseless charges, you might well do some research and see what you can come up to substantiate and support your flimsy charge. Here's some stuff that might improve your mind, mostly with a right-wing slant that you might appreciate.
CFR -- For the worst about CFR 4rie.com read it all and relax into a deep and sound slumber, -- all is well -- we are protected by the rich and famous. Besides, there is a lot about parliamentary procedure that SI might look into as a model.
Books on Rusk:
America's Role in International Social Welfare Alva : Altmeyer, A.J. Myrdal, Dean Rusk Hardcover / Published 1960
The American Revolution and the future : delivered in Ford's Theatr Washington, D.C., on June 17, 1974 Dean Rusk
As I Saw It Dean Rusk / Published 1991
As I Saw It Dean Rusk, Daniel S. Papp (Editor) / Published 1990
Dean R Warren I. Cohen / Published 1980
The Strategic Defense Initiative : New Perspectives on Deterrence (Dean Rusk Center Monograph) Dorinda G. Dallmeyer (Editor) / Published 1986 Waging Peace and War : Dean Rusk in the Truman, Kennedy and Johnson Years Thomas Schoenbaum / Published 1988
John D. Rockefeller, voteview.gsia.cmu.edu
(pretty favorable view -- only part of the story of course)
BTW: this post is loaded with errors; if you have the time I would appreciate your attention. TIA. |
