“Two systems are before the world; the one looks to increasing
the proportion of persons and of capital engaged in trade and transportation,
and therefore to diminishing the proportion engaged in producing commodities
with which to trade, with necessarily diminished return to the labor of all;
while the other looks to increasing the proportion engaged in the work of
production, and diminishing that engaged in trade and transportation, with
increased return to all, giving to the laborer good wages, and to the owner of
capital good profits… One looks towards universal war; the other towards
universal peace. One is the English system; the other we may be proud to call
the American system, for it is the only one ever devised the tendency of which
was that of elevating while equalizing the condition of man throughout the
world.”
-Henry C. Carey (Lincoln’s advisor), Harmony of
Interests, 1856
The British Hand Behind the Deep State Today
With the election of Donald Trump in November 2016, it has
become apparent for that America isn’t what many thought it was.
Suddenly, for the first time since the assassination of John F.
Kennedy in 1963, there was no longer one America but rather two opposing forces
within America itself, and the question was raised “which is the real America
and what is it that Trump was re-activating?”
Here was a political leader who wasn’t from the technocratic
establishment, and who campaigned to work with Russia and China, end regime
change wars, reverse the nation-killing effects of NAFTA, reviving the JFK-era
space mission and even discussed restoring Glass Steagall.
A clue to what he chose to represent can be witnessed in his
defense of the “American System” when he said “this is the system our
Founders wanted. Our greatest American leaders — including George Washington,
Hamilton, Jackson, Lincoln — they all agreed that for America to be a strong
nation it must also be a great manufacturing nation.”
Soon, it became apparent that this Deep State structure
mobilized to stop the re-emergence of the American System was not even American
as many had supposed, but rather of a purely British Imperial pedigree and was
even caught working against British nationalists such as Jeremy Corbyn. It
finally came to light that the British Empire had never gone away after WWII,
but had evoked a powerful sleight of hand after FDR’s untimely death in 1945.
How did this happen? By what means and motives did this Deep
State arise? Was it always there or were there key moments in history that give
us clarity into its origins and how it took over both America and other nations
alike?
By approaching history shaped by a battle between British and
American systems of social order (which represents much more than merely
British or American nations per se), a “master key” to unlock the secrets of
Britain’s takeover of America (and Europe) can be found by exploring the
strange case of Canada.
What is this “strange partly British/partly American monarchy of
the Americas”? At the best of times it was uplifted by the best constitutional
traditions of America cited by Donald Trump above, and at the worst of times it
was a platform to spread British intrigues upon the world exemplified by the
Montreal-based assassinations of American System leaders Abraham Lincoln in
1865 and John F. Kennedy in 1963. Today those intrigues are led by such Rhodes Scholars
as Chrystia Freeland and the modern Round Table movement of Ben Rowswell who
have together played leading roles in the overthrow of Venezuela, the
protection of fascists in Ukraine and advance of NATO against Russia and China.
The time has come to drag some skeletons out of the closet.
Lincoln’s American System Goes Global
Canada’s struggle for existence as a sovereign nation has been
caught between two opposing views of mankind represented by the British and
American System of social organization. As the great economist Henry C. Carey
laid out while he was advancing the policy of Abraham Lincoln, the American
System was designed to become a global system operating amongst sovereign
nations for the progress and mutual benefit of each and all. By the end of the
19th century, American System thinking was resonating with
statesmen and patriots in all corners of the globe who were fed up with the
ancient imperial system of British Free Trade that had always strived to
maintain a world divided and monopolized. This view for a post-colonial world
was exemplified by Lincoln-ally and first Governor of Colorado William
Gilpinwho described a world united by railways across all continents
centered around the Bering Strait rail connection. This was outlined in his
widely read 1890 “The
Cosmopolitan Railway”.
Although British propagandists had made every attempt to keep
the illusion of the sacredness of the British System alive in the minds of its
subjects, the undeniable increase of quality of life, and creative thought
expressed by the American System everywhere it was applied become too strong to
ignore… especially within colonies such as Canada that had long suffered a
fragmented, and underdeveloped identity as the price paid for loyalty to the
British Empire.
In Germany, the American System-inspired Zollverein (customs
union) had not only unified a divided nation, but elevated it to a level of
productive power and sovereignty which had outpaced the monopoly power of the
British East India Company. In Japan, American engineers helped assemble trains
funded by a national banking system, and protective tariff during the Meiji
Restoration.
In Russia, American System follower Sergei Witte, Transport
Minister and close advisor to Czar Alexander II, revolutionized the Russian
economy with the American made trains that rolled across the Trans-Siberian
Railway. Under the influence of Witte and other American System allies Czar
Nicholas II endorsed the Bering Strait rail connection in 1905, though a tragic
turn of fate sabotaged it from unfolding.
Not even the Ottoman Empire remained untouched by the
inspiration for progress, as the Berlin to Baghdad Railway was begun with the
intention of unleashing a bold program of modernization of southwest Asia.
The American System Touches the Canadian Mind
In Canada, admirers of Lincoln and Henry C. Carey found their
spokesman in the great American System statesman Isaac
Buchanan (1). Buchanan rose to his highest position of political office
in the Dominion of Canada when in April 1864, the new MacDonald-Taché Ministry
appointed him the President of the Executive Council. This put him in firm
opposition to the Imperial agenda of George Brown, and the later Prime Minister
John A. Macdonald, of whom he and all patriotic co-thinkers counted as bitter
enemies to Canada’s independence and progress. The policy which Buchanan
advocated as he rose to higher prominence was outlined in his December 1863
speech:
“The adoption by England for herself of this transcendental
principle [Free Trade] has all but lost the Colonies, and her madly attempting
to make it the principle of the British Empire would entirely alienate the
Colonies. Though pretending to unusual intelligence, the Manchester Schools are,
as a class, as void of knowledge of the world as of patriotic principle… As a
necessary consequence of the legislation of England, Canada will require
England to assent to the establishment of two things: 1st,
an American Zollverein [aka: Customs Union]. 2nd:
Canada to be made neutral territory in time of any war between England and the
United States”. (2)
While the customs union modelled on the Zollverein program of
American System economist Friedrich List in Germany laid out by Buchanan, was
temporarily defeated during the operation known as the Articles of
Confederation in 1867, the potential for its re-emergence returned in 1896 with
the election of Wilfrid Laurier, Canada’s next Prime Minister. By 1911, the
customs union policy advanced by Laurier, who was a devout admirer of Abraham
Lincoln, finally came to fruition. Laurier long recognized that Canada’s
interests did not reside in the anti-American program of MacDonald which simply
tied Canada into greater dependence towards the mother country, but rather with
the interests of its southern neighbour. His Reciprocity program proposed to
lower protective tariffs with the USA primarily on agriculture, but with the
intention to electrify and industrialize Canada, a nation which Laurier saw as
supporting 60 million people within two decades. With the collaboration of
his close advisors, Adam Shortt, Oscar Skelton and later William Lyon Mackenzie
King, Laurier navigated the mine field of his British enemies active throughout
the Canadian landscape in the form of the Masonic “Orange Order” of Ontario,
and later, the insidious Round Table movement.
While Laurier’s attempts to actualize a true Reciprocity Treaty
of 1911 that involved free trade among North American economies united under a
protective tariff against British dumping of cheap goods, it would not last, as
every resource available to the British run Orange Order and Round Table were
activated to ensure the Reciprocity’s final defeat and the downfall of
Laurier’s Liberal government and its replacement by the Conservative government
of Sir Robert Borden in its stead.(3) Laurier described the situation in Canada
after this event:
“Canada is now governed by a junta sitting at London, known as
“The Round Table”, with ramifications in Toronto, in Winnipeg, in Victoria,
with Tories and Grits receiving their ideas from London and insidiously forcing
them on their respective parties.” (4)
Two years before Laurier uttered this warning, the founder of
the Round Table movement, Lord Milner wrote to one of his co-conspirators
laying out the strategic danger faced by Buchanan and Laurier’s program with
America:
“As between the three possibilities of the future: 1. Closer
Imperial Union, 2. Union with the U.S. and 3. Independence, I believe
definitely that No. 2 is the real danger. I do not think the Canadians
themselves are aware of it… they are wonderfully immature in political
reflection on the big issues, and hardly realize how powerful the influences
are…” (5)
Without understanding either the existential struggle between
the two opposing systems related above, or the creation of the Round Table
movement by a new breed of British Imperialist as a response to Lincoln’s
international victory in the face of the total bankruptcy of the British Empire
at the turn of the last century, then no Canadian could honestly ever make
sense of what has shaped his or her cultural and political landscape. It is the
purpose of this present report to shed a clear light upon some of the principal
actors on this stage of universal history with the hope that the reader’s
powers of insight may be strengthened such that those necessary powers of
judgement required to lead both Canada and the world out of our current plunge
into a new dark age may yet occur.
The Round Table Movement: New Racist Breed, Same Racist Species
The Round Table movement served as the intellectual center of
the international operations to regain control of the British Empire and took
on several incarnations over the 20th century. It worked in tandem with the
Coefficients Club, the Fabian Society, and the Rhodes Trust, all of whom
witnessed members moving in and out of each other’s ranks. The historian Carrol
Quigley, of Georgetown University wrote of this cabal in his posthumously
published “Anglo-American
Establishment” (6):
“This organization has been able to conceal its existence quite
successfully, and many of its most influential members, satisfied to possess
the reality rather than the appearance of power, are unknown even to close
students of British history. This is the more surprising when we learn that one
of the chief methods by which this Group works has been through propaganda.
It plotted the Jameson Raid of 1895; it caused the Boer War of
1899-1902; it set up and controls the Rhodes Trust; it created the Union of
South Africa in 1906-1910; it established the South African periodical The
State in 1908; it founded the British Empire periodical The Round Table in
1910, and this remains the mouthpiece of the Group; it has been the most
powerful single influence in All Souls, Balliol, and New Colleges at Oxford for
more than a generation; it has controlled The Times for more than fifty years,
with the exception of the three years 1919-1922, it publicized the idea of and
the name “British Commonwealth of Nations” in the period 1908-1918, it was the
chief influence in Lloyd George’s war administration in 1917-1919 and dominated
the British delegation to the Peace Conference of 1919; it had a great deal to
do with the formation and management of the League of Nations and of the system
of mandates; it founded the Royal Institute of International Affairs in 1919
and still controls it; it was one of the chief influences on British policy
toward Ireland, Palestine, and India in the period 1917-1945; it was a very
important influence on the policy of appeasement of Germany during the years
1920-1940; and it controlled and still controls, to a very considerable extent,
the sources and the writing of the history of British Imperial and foreign
policy since the Boer War.” (7)
To understand the pedigree of the Round Table movement as it was
“officially” unveiled in 1910 as the ideological shaper of the policies and
paradigm of the new “managerial class” of international imperialists dedicated
to the salvation of the British Empire under an “Imperial Federation”, it would
be necessary to go back a few decades prior, to 1873-74. It was in this year
that a young Canadian named George Parkin lectured at Oxford on the subject
imperial union as the sacred duty of all Anglo Saxons to advance. Parkin is
popularly heralded by Oxford historians as “the man who shifted the
mind of England”.
1873-1902 Empire on the Verge of Collapse: Re-organize or Perish
During this same period, a grouping of Imperial intellectuals
known as the “X Club” (f. 1865) centering on Thomas Huxley, Matthew Arnold,
Herbert Spencer and Joseph Hooker were assigned the responsibility to overhaul
the British Empire’s controlling ideological structures that had proven
themselves worn out. Each would specialize on various branches of the sciences
and would all promote gradualist interpretations of change to counteract
explanations which required creative leaps. This program was applied with the
intention of: 1) saving the collapsing empire and 2) establishing the
foundation of a new scientific religion based upon Charles Darwin’s highly
materialistic model of Natural Selection as the explanation for the
evolution and differentiation of new species.
As X Club co-founder Herbert Spencer went on to elaborate the
system of “social Darwinism” as the logical outgrowth of Darwin’s system into human
affairs, the intention behind the propagation of the Darwinian program was
never “the enlightenment liberalism in battle against the ignorant
dogmas of religion”, as it is so often recounted by popular historians
of science. Rather, the “revolution in science” initiated by the X Club was
merely the re-packaging of an idea as old as Babylon: The control of the masses
by a system of oligarchical rule, simply under a new type of “scientific
dictatorship”. But how, when the demonstration of creative reason’s
power to elevate humanity’s conditions of life by encouraging new discoveries
and applied technologies, as promoted by the American System of Political
Economy, would the world now accept the conditions of mental and political
enslavement demanded by the imperialist in a fixed system struggle for
diminishing returns?
This was the challenge upon which young Oxford men would set
their creative energies using the “scientific” reasoning established by Thomas
Huxley’s X Club and for the service of the ruling oligarchical families of
Europe. George Parkin like all young Oxford men at this time, was highly
influenced by this network’s ideas, and used them to justify the “natural scientific
inevitability” of the hegemony of the strong over the weak. In this
case, the Anglo Saxon master race dominating the inferior peoples of the earth.
This message could be seen in his 1892 work Imperial Federation:
“Nations take long to grow, but there are periods when, as in the long delayed
flowering of certain plants, or in the crystallization of chemical solutions,
new forms are taken with extreme rapidity. There are the strongest reasons for
believing that the British nation has such a period immediately before it. The
necessity for the creation of a body of sound public opinion upon the relations
to each other of the various parts of the Empire is therefore urgent.” (8)
In elaborating upon the danger of the British System’s collapse
in light of nationalist movements following the American System model, Parkin
went on to ask: “Has our capacity for political organization reached
its utmost limit? For the British people this is the question of questions. In
the whole range of possible political variations in the future there is no
issue of such far reaching significance, not merely for our own people but for
the world at large, as the question whether the British Empire shall remain a
political unit… or yielding to disintegrating forces, shall allow the stream of
the national life to be parted into many separate channels.” (9)
One of Parkin’s Oxford contemporaries was Alfred Milner, a
character who plays a vicious role in our drama as the catalyzer behind the
formation of the Round Table Movement. Milner credited Parkin with giving his
life direction from that point on (10). It was during 1876 that another
contemporary of Milner and Parkin, named Cecil Rhodes left Oxford in order to
make a fortune on a cotton plantation in South Africa. All three characters
were also highly influenced by John Ruskin, the leader of the “artistic” branch
of British Intelligence led by the “Pre-Raphaelite Society”.
The proceeds of Rhodes’ cotton fortune were multiplied many
times by ventures into the diamond industry of South Africa, allowing him to
rise to gargantuan heights of political power and wealth, peaking with his
appointment as Prime Minister of Cape Town and Founder of Rhodesia. The current
London-centered mineral cartels Rio Tinto, De Beers, and Lonrho now pillaging
Africa, as well as the legacy of Apartheid which has stained so much of South
Africa’s history are among two aspects of the scarring legacy Rhodes has passed
down to present times.
Between 1876 and his becoming High Commissioner to South Africa
in 1897, Milner’s path slightly diverged from Rhodes. Milner was recruited by
the editor of the Pall Mall Gazette William T. Stead and became associate
editor soon thereafter. The Gazette’s function was set out in the Pall Mall
Gospel, a short mission statement which Stead demanded all of his employees
abide to: “The Federation of the British Empire is the condition of its
survival… as an Empire we must federate or perish.” The gospel also
propagandized for the “inevitable destiny” that the USA and Britain “coalesce”
(11). The role which the Pall Mall played in coordinating a cohesive vision of
empire was the model followed by Milner and his minions later as they ran the
Round Table periodicals. Stead was officially recruited to the grand design in
1889 which was instigated by Rhodes and his sponsor Lord Rothschild. It was
when Stead had been recently released for prison due to his Gazette’s promotion
of “organized vice” only to find his paper in serious financial trouble, when
he was first called upon by Cecil Rhodes, a long time follower of his journal
in South Africa. After their first meeting, Stead ecstatically wrote to his
wife:
“Mr. Rhodes is my man! I have just had three hours talk with
him. He is full of a far more gorgeous idea in connection with the paper than
even I have had. I cannot tell you his scheme because it is too secret. But it
involves millions. He had no idea that it would cost £250,000 to start a paper.
But he offered me down as a free gift £20,000 to buy a share in the P.M.
Gazette as a beginning… His ideas are federation, expansion, and consolidation
of the Empire…. He took to me. Told me some things he has told no other
man—save Lord Rothschild— and pressed me to take the £20,000, not to have any
return, to give no receipt, to simply take it and use it to give me a freer
hand on the P.M.G. It seems all like a fairy dream….” (12)
Quigley demonstrates that both Milner and Stead had become
active members of the agenda laid out by Cecil Rhodes. But what was this
agenda? In a series of seven wills written between 1879 and 1901,” Rhodes, the
unapologetic racist, laid out his designs for the re-conquering of the world
and indoctrinating young elites into his design:
“Let us form the same kind of society, a Church for the
extension of the British Empire. A society which should have its members in
every part of the British Empire working with one object and one idea we
should have its members placed at our universities and our schools and should
watch the English youth passing through their hands just one perhaps in every
thousand would have the mind and feelings for such an object, he should be
tried in every way, he should be tested whether he is endurant, possessed of
eloquence, disregardful of the petty details of life, and if found to be
such, then elected and bound by oath to serve for the rest of his life in his
Country. He should then be supported if without means by the Society and sent
to that part of the Empire where it was felt he was needed.’
In another will, Rhodes described in more detail his
intention: To and for the establishment, promotion and development of a
Secret Society, the true aim and object whereof shall be for the extension of
British rule throughout the world. The colonization by British subjects of all
lands where the means of livelihood are attainable by energy, labour, and
enterprise and especially the occupation by British settlers of the entire
Continent of Africa, the Holy Land, the Valley of the Euphrates, the islands of
Cyprus and Candia, the whole of South America, the islands of the Pacific not
heretofore possessed by Great Britain, the whole of the Malay Archipelago,
these aboard of China and Japan, [and] the ultimate recovery of
the United States of America as an integral part of the British
Empire.” (13)
It was under this specific design to create an indoctrination
system of talented young disciples that Rhodes’ dream of stealing the world and
reconquering America that the Rhodes Trust was established upon his death in
1902. Some historians have maintained that since Rhodes doesn’t literally bring
up his call for a secret society in his last two wills, he must have “matured”
and left those notions behind him. Yet Professor Quigley points out, that the
belief pushed by such “authoritative” historians is a farce, evidenced by
George Parkin’s revealing observation taken from his book The Rhodes
Scholarship, published in 1912: “It is essential to remember
that this final will is consistent with those which had preceded it, that it
was no late atonement for errors, as some have supposed, but was the
realization of life-long dreams persistently pursued.” (14)
Upon Rhodes’ death, George Parkin became the first head of the
Rhodes Scholarship Trust in 1902 leaving his post as Principal of Upper Canada
College (1895-1902) to fulfill his duty. It was under this post that Parkin
recruited fellow Upper Canada College professor Edward Peacock, who joined him
as a Rhodes trustee and promoter of what became the Canadian branches of the
Round Table movement. While organizing for the ouster of Prime Minister Wilfrid
Laurier and the defeat of the 1911 Reciprocity Treaty, this group recruited
young talented disciples from their college connections along the way. The
model of the Round Table involved a central coordinating body in London, with
branches strategically placed throughout the Commonwealth in order to provide
one vision and voice to the young and talented “upper managerial class” of the
reformed British Empire. Parkin and Peacock were joined by Lord Alfred Milner,
Sir Arthur Glazebrook, W.T. Stead, Arthur Balfour and Lord Nathan Rothschild as
co-trustees.
Working in tandem with the eugenicists of the Fabian Society of
Sidney and Beatrice Webb, Balfour had founded the first International Eugenics
Conference in 1912 alongside enthusiastic recruits such as young Roundtable
member Winston Churchill. Charles Darwin’s cousin and founder of eugenics, Sir
Francis Galton died mere weeks before being able to keynote the conference. The
Fabian Society and its sister organization “The Co-efficients Club” featured
such other prominent eugenicists as Bertrand Russell, Halford Mackinder, H.G.
Wells and George Bernard Shaw, and later Harold Laski and John Maynard Keynes [see
accompanying article on the Eugenics bent of the Fabian Society]. Membership
rosters of either organization frequently overlapped (15)
Much of the dirty work conducted by the original Roundtable
movement was run primarily by the group of young Oxford men who got their start
managing imperial affairs under Milner during the Boer War suppression of the
Transvaal (South African) uprising of 1899 to 1902. Of this Kindergarden,
Philip Kerr and Lionel Curtis were tasked with coordinating the Canadian branches
from London (with Parkin and Peacock leading from Canada). While Oxford had
long been the indoctrination center of young elites for centuries prior, now
with the Rhodes Scholarship program in place, a new level of standardization
had been initiated. The new program provided scholarships to young talent
primarily throughout the Anglo Saxon family of nations which Rhodes yearned to
see re-absorbed under one Aryan umbrella. The Fabian Society had founded the
London School of Economics (LSE) for similar purposes. Both the LSE and Oxford
have worked hand in hand at crafting agents of imperial change throughout the
entire 20th century (16).
Each student, upon selection, would be provided a scholarship to
Oxford University, a generous stipend, and red carpet treatment into the upper
echelons of the ruling oligarchical social networks, if the student so willed.
Each student was returned to their home country enflamed with a burning desire
to fulfill the objectives of the British Empire and advance “the scientific management
of society”. Their talents were expressed either in elected office, working in
the civil service, media, law, the private sector or in academia. In most
cases, these scholars acted upon the Fabian method of ‘permeation theory’…
slowly permeating all levels of society’s controlling structures in order to
shape perception and shift the invisible structures controlling mass behaviour
away from a current of progress and love of truth and towards a materialistic
struggle for survival. Each year, one scholarship was granted to each of the
Canadian provinces (with the exception of P.E.I) and 32 were granted to
the United States. To the present date, approximately 7000 scholarships have
been awarded with increasing openness to the non-Aryan countries to service the
imperial agenda.
The Milnerite Vincent Massey and the Rebirth of Canadian
Oligarchism
While the Canadian experiment has long been trapped by its
loyalist (anti-republican) tendencies fueled by such oligarchical systems as
the Family Compact (17), Canada has never had a self-contained ruling class as
witnessed in the case of Britain. To this present day, the London centered
oligarchy loyal to Babylonian traditions, is expressed by the imperial crown as
the “fount of all honours” from which all legal and actual authority across the
Commonwealth emanates. This has been the model upon which different generations
of the Canadian oligarchy have been shaped. Similarly, the American oligarchy
has tended to follow a similar model of organization with families recruited by
the Crown’s agents such as the Rockefellers, Morgans, Harrimans and Duponts who
have merely shaped their values and customs of behaviour around the system led
by the British Crown, and represent nothing at all intrinsically “American”. All
attempts to evaluate history from the bias of “an international bankers
conspiracy” or even “American imperialism” without this higher understanding of
the British Empire is thus doomed to failure.
One of the central figures in the Rhodes network in forming the
character and structure of the Canadian oligarchy, as well as the general mass
culture of Canada is a man named Vincent Massey. Massey is the son-in-law of
George Parkin, who, following the Darwinian edict of “breeding with the best”
married his four daughters to leading Round Table and Oxford men. Massey, born
into the wealthy Hart-Massey family dynasty became an early recruit to the
Round Table, working alongside Canadian Round Table co-founder Arthur
Glazebrook in setting up a branch in Ontario in 1911. Glazebrook admired Parkin
so much that he even named his son George Parkin de Twenebroker Glazebrook,
himself a Rhodes Scholar of Balliol who went on to help run this group
alongside Massey by the late 1930s and would head the Canadian secret service
during World War II. Arthur Glazebrook wrote a shining letter of recommendation
to Milner upon Massey’s departure for studies at Oxford’s Balliol College
on Aug. 11, 1911:
“I have given a letter of introduction to you to a young man
called Vincent Massey. He is about 23 or 24 years of age, very well off, and
full of enthusiasm for the most invaluable assistance in the Roundtable and in
connection with the junior groups… He is going home to Balliol, for a two year
course in history, having already taken his degree at the Toronto University.
At the end of his two years he expects to return to Canada and take up some
kind of serious work, either as a professor at the university or at some other
non-money making pursuit. I have become really very attached to him and I hope
you will give him an occasional talk. I think it so important to get hold of
these first rate young Canadians, and I know what a power you have over young
men. I should like to feel that he could become definitely by knowledge a
Milnerite” (18)
Upon his return to Canada, Massey quickly rose in the ranks of
the Roundtable, becoming Crown Privy Councilor in 1925, then leading a
delegation in 1926 at the Imperial Conference at which point his fellow
Roundtabler Lord Balfour passed the Balfour Declaration as a means of appeasing
the nationalist sentiment hot in many colonies striving for independence from
the mother country. Massey then became Canada’s first Minister (aka:
ambassador) to the United States (1926-1930), where he coordinated policy with
controlling institutions around the intelligence institutions centered around
the Council on Foreign Relations. During his time in Washington, Massey’s
official biographer (and University of Toronto President from 1958-1971) Claude
Bissel points out that he was a frequent guest in “The House of Truth”, a
stronghold of Round Table ideas in the United States housing such luminaries as
Walter Lipmann, Felix Frankfurter, Loring Christie, Eustace Percy, and
featuring such frequent guests as Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes,
and McGeorge Bundy. Most of these characters were hardcore eugenicists
affiliated with the Council on Foreign Relations (the American branch of the
Royal Institute for International Affairs) advancing the program of a
British-led “Anglo-American Empire”. Oxford men Loring Christie, and Hume Wrong
were both recruited to Massey’s staff during this period and played important
roles in the postwar takeover of Canadian foreign policy. Hume’s father George
Wrong was also an influential executive member of the Canadian Round Table and
Massey ally.
Massey’s Washington deployment was followed by a stint as
President of the Liberal Federation of Canada (1932-1935), and then Canadian
High Commissioner to London (1935-1946). It was soon after this experience that
Massey was assigned to unleash the second of a series of Royal Commissions
(1949-1951) dedicated to destroy any lingering sentiments of the American
System within the hearts, minds, political-artistic-scientific structures or
economic behaviour of Canada, and reconstruct the Canadian identity based on
his own twisted image. This operation had the dual effect of relieving
responsibility from the Rockefeller and Carnegie Foundations financial
responsibility for crafting the Canadian identity (19). As a token for a job
well done, Massey then became the first Canadian-born Governor General
(1952-1959). During his career, Massey served as Governor for Upper Canada
College, and the University of Toronto, as well as founder of a university modeled
on All Souls, Oxford called Massey College (f.1962). Like All Souls, Massey
College serves as a central coordinating node for various operations run
through the major universities in Canada.
Through his various political positions, Massey pulled every string
possible to recruit as many agents of the Roundtable Movement and Rhodes Trust
networks into prominent positions within the Canadian civil service, cultural
control, and academia. During this same period in the United States, Rhodes
scholars had swarmed into various influential positions of authority, with a
special focus on the State Department, in order to prepare to commandeer
Roosevelt’s New Deal program and convert it into a Keynesian nightmare at the
first available opportunity. These operations resulted in a third attempt by
the British Empire to achieve an agenda that had largely failed in its first
two attempts between 1902 and 1933 (20). It is proper to briefly go through the
first two before continuing with our report.
The First Attempt Fails: Imperial Union 1911-1923
The First incarnation of the World Government agenda to
supersede the principle of sovereignty as the basis for world affairs had been
the Imperial Union thesis around which the Roundtable had first been created.
This involved the creation of a Federation of nations united under one empire,
in which representatives of various colonies could hold representatives within
an Imperial Parliament, much like the European Union structure chaining nations
under the Troika today. The obvious mission under this structure was the
participation of the United States ruled by the “economic royalists” of whom
Roosevelt said should have left the nation back in 1776. Under Parliamentary
structures, little more than an illusion of democracy exists while its
bureaucratic nature permits for optimal control by a ruling oligarchy.
By the end of World War I, forces within the Round Table were
dreading the failure of this program, and had resolved to dedicate themselves
instead to the League of Nations doctrine in its stead whereby essentially the
same outcome could be achieved, but through different means. Under this
changing of gears, it was arranged that the Round Table be phased out in place
of something new. Two aging controllers of Milner’s Kindergarten writing to
each other in 1931 laid this problem squarely on the table and even proposed a
solution:
“As a brotherhood we have lost interest in the Empire and are no
longer competent to deal with it. I think, therefore, that if The Round Table
is to go on, it should quite definitely change its character, remove its
subtitle, and become, what it is much more fitted to become at the present
time, a publication connected with the Royal Institute of International
Affairs… all the heart and soul of The Round Table movement is petering out and
I really don’t know that we stand for anything in particular nowadays.” (21)
It was with this failure of its original blueprint in mind that
the Roundtable Movement began a conversion into its new costume with the
creation of the Royal Institute for International Affairs (RIIA) in 1919,
followed immediately thereafter with branches in the United States under the
heading of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and International Pacific
Institute. Carrol Quigley demonstrates that the CFR and IPI featured crossovers
of members from the RIIA, CIIA, while funding was provided through the
Rockefeller Foundation, Carnegie Foundation and RIIA. While possessing
nominally American names, these organizations and their members were fully
British.
The Failure of the Second Attempt: The Round Table Transformed
1923-1930
Both the RIIA, CFR and IPI were financed through large grants by
the Rockefeller and Carnegie foundations which themselves were set up merely as
financial instruments to further the British Imperial agenda at the same time
the Round Table Movement was unveiled in 1910. These were two of the core
foundations which had been used to finance eugenics laws and the
statistics-based “scientific” premises justifying their political
implementation. Quigley documents in his works the extensive array of financial
support which these “philanthropic” organizations bestowed upon their London
controllers.
Due to the regaining of power of the Liberal Party, now under
the leadership of Mackenzie King, the Canadian infiltration was not happening
at the pace which some RIIA operatives would have liked. In fact, due to the
influence of key Laurier Liberals such as Oscar Skelton and King’s Justice
Minister Ernest Lapointe in the famous Imperial Conference of 1923, the last
attempt to impose the Round Table thesis for Imperial Union was defeated in
that form. By 1925, Roundtable controller Philip Kerr (aka: Lord Lothian) wrote
of the anti-British situation in Canada guided by Lapointe and Skelton in the
following terms:
“I am afraid that things in Canada are not at present as
satisfactory as they are in the United States… I even found in places a certain
feeling that it was a mistake for returned scholars to avow themselves as
Rhodes scholars and that the best would be that they should merge themselves in
the population and forget their unhappy past!” (22)
In 1925, O.D. Skelton, Laurier’s friend and biographer, as well
as longtime friend and trusted collaborator of Prime Minister William Lyon
Mackenzie King, was made Undersecretary of External Affairs. It was also at
this time that resistance to Rhodes Scholar penetration into guiding positions
of national policy was obstinately begun.
Canadian cooperation with British foreign policy largely came
undone beginning with the Canadian rejection of Britain’s demands that Canada
commit its forces to Britain’s near-war with Turkey during the Chanak Crisis of
1922. In subsequent Imperial Conferences throughout the 1920s, the Laurier
Liberals led by Skelton and Lapointe went on to flank and reject various
attempts at binding foreign policy between Imperial Federation or the League of
Nations. Collaboration with leaders of the Free Irish State against Imperial
policy was key in the success of the Canadian patriots’ fending off the Round
Table.
Mackenzie King’s Failed Personality
Massey’s biographers have commonly referenced his own
frustration with Skelton whom he saw as a barrier between himself and the Prime
Minister, a man who he could generally manipulate as long as no one with
geostrategic insight was near him (23). King’s increasing lack of cooperation
with British Foreign policy resulted in the following quote by Massey
brother-in-law, and Round Table member William Grant in 1925:
“It is very difficult to make a permanent impression on him
[King] for two reasons. 1) He is as selfish a man as I have ever known, the
selfishness disguised by a thick smear of sentimentalism. He will, therefore,
sacrifice anyone or anything to his ambition, and then sob about it. 2) He has
a mind as lacking in edge as a jellyfish. Fortunately for you he has a real
fund of dignified, though rather windy eloquence, and will do little harm if
given plenty of speeches to make” (24)
The Grant quote is instructive as it provides the reader an
insight into the singular character flaw of King which would taint him his
entire life. That is, the pitiful fact of his “other-directedness”, such that
his tendency to frustrate evil influences who wished to use him for their own
nefarious ends was frequently balanced by the frustration of good influences
who tried to influence him the other way. For good or for ill, King was never
his own man but was, in the end, a mother-dominated mystic who could never
sever his ideological affiliations with the Monarchy. He may have been a man of
deep personal conviction in a higher cause… but like the poor Venetian Prince
in Schiller’s “The Ghost Seer”, his convictions were never his
own. After the death of Skelton in 1940, King’s neurotic insecurity would
express itself in his relief to be liberated by Skelton’s domineering influence:
“I have frequently been thrown off following my own judgement and wisdom in
these matters by pressure from Skelton and the staff that I made up my mind I
would not henceforth yield to anything of the kind” (25). In
another diary entry a year later, King wrote: “One of the effects of
Skelton’s passing will be to make me express my own views much more
strongly”. (26)
King’s pro-monarchist inclinations permanently schismed his
modus operandi from those influences who he otherwise respected, evidenced in
the following diary recordings of Skelton and King during two Imperial
Conferences: “I defend ultimate independence, which he [King]
opposes”, while after another conference, King later wrote: “[Skelton]
is at heart against the British Empire, which I am not. I believe in the larger
whole, with complete independence of the parts united by cooperation in all
common ends”. (27)
Chatham House Comes to Canada
The Canadian branch of the RIIA (aka:’ Chatham House’) was
created only in 1928, (at the same time as its Australian counterpart) largely
as a response to the anti-Round Table tendencies of the Laurier Liberals upon
King. The CIIA’s first President was none other than former Canadian Prime
Minister and Masonic Orangeman Sir Robert Borden. Its second president was
Newton Rowell, who later became president of the Canadian Bar Association, and
chaired the failed Rowell-Sirois Royal Commission of 1935-1937 (28). Sir Joseph
Flavelle and Vincent Massey were Vice Presidents and George Parkin de T.
Glazebrook was honorary secretary. Other founding members were financier and
later Conservative Party Cabinet official J.M. Macdonnell, Carnegie
Foundation Trustee N.A.M. Mackenzie, UCC President William Grant, Rhodes
Scholar George Raleigh Parkin, financier Edgar Tarr, journalist J.W. Dafoe, and
Henry Angus. Raleigh Parkin, Grant and Macdonnell also had the distinction of
being brothers-in-law with Vincent Massey, and sons-in-law of George Parkin. In
1933, through a donation from the Massey Foundation (which served as a mini
clone of the Rockefeller Foundation), the CIIA hired its first Permanent
Secretary named Escott Reid. Reid was a Rhodes Scholar fanatically governed by
a commitment to world government through the League of Nations, expressed by
his following remarks:
“It would be easier and more self-respecting for Canada to
give up to an international body on which it was represented, the decision on
which it should go to war than to transfer the right to make that decision from
the government in Ottawa to the government in Washington.. It would thus
appear probable that effective military cooperation between Canada and the
United States is possible only within the framework of an effective world order
of which both Canada and the United States are loyal members.” (29)
The five years after the CIIA was established, an affiliate
organization was founded called the Canadian Institute for Public Affairs
(CIPA) by similar networks associated with the CIIA, in order to shape national
internal policy while the CIIA focused upon Canada’s foreign policy. Original
featured speakers were the CIIA’s Norman Mackenzie, and the eugenicist leader
of the newly created CCF Party J.S. Woodsworth. It would be another 20 years
before both organizations began to jointly host conferences together. Today,
CIPA exists in the form of the Couchiching Conferences and their regular
brainwashing seminars have been broadcast across the Canadian Broadcasting
Corporation (CBC) for over 70 years.
The CIPA was affiliated with the YMCA, itself a major
British-run indoctrination asset as it focused spreading its ideology on
conferences, and workshops the world over. It was through this network that a
young Maurice Strong was recruited and rose to the highest echelons of the
management of the oligarchy’s affairs in later years.
1932-1935: America’s New Deal Crushes the League of Nations
Before FDR came to power in 1932, the United States was brought
to its knees after four years of Great Depression itself induced by the blowout
of a housing bubble built up artificially by British-Wall Street agents such as
U.S. Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon. It was during this time of fear and want
that the American population was at its most gullible, largely accepting the
propaganda that immigration and bad genes were the cause of the rampant
criminality in these painful years. The vast majority of the sterilization laws
passed and fascist sympathy cultivated occurred during this time of fear.
As Franklin Roosevelt rallied the population behind the battle
cry “there is nothing to fear but fear itself, and kicked the money lenders out
of the temple through the implementation of Glass-Steagall and the activation
of public credit issued through the Reconstruction Finance Corporation. The
RIIA running their networks in Canada and especially in the United States had
to re-adjust their programs. The renewed faith in the powers of sovereign
government in effecting progressive change by the activation of the American
System principles were evaporating the belief that world government was the
only option for peace to be ensured. However, change for an empire is not
always easy, and after decades of investing energy into their reconquest of the
United States, the British made a violent attempt to crush FDR.
A startling revelation swept through the press in 1933 with
General Smedley Butler’s public unveiling of the Wall Street-backed attempt to
run a coup d’état against Roosevelt using 500 000 legionnaires (30). General
Butler’s unveiling of the plan to install himself as puppet dictator was
recounted in Butler’s famous book “War is a Racket” (31). This
attempted coup had occurred mere months after the thwarted Masonic-run
assassination plot to kill FDR which resulted in the killing of Mayor Cermak of
Chicago.
As Pierre Beaudry reported in his study on
the Synarchy: “It was not a mere coincidence that, at the same time
the British promoted the Nazis in Europe, in 1934, the synarchist Lazard Freres
and J.P. Morgan financial interests in the United States were staging a similar
fascist dictatorial coup against Franklin D. Roosevelt, using the same
disgruntled Veterans of Foreign Wars groupings with operatives from the French
Croix de Feu deployed to the United States. They ultimately failed to capture
the leadership of General Smedley Butler, who ended the U.S. plot by publicly
denouncing the conspiracy as the fascist coup that it was.” (32)
After having failed miserably in applying aggressive fascism in
America, as was being done in Europe as the “solution” to the economic woes of
the depression orchestrated by agents of the British Empire on Wall Street, the
Rhodes networks decided that the only chance to defeat FDR was through the old
Fabian method of infiltration and co-option. Every attempt was made to
infiltrate New Deal institutions at all costs such that their full co-opting
could occur relatively seamlessly upon the first opportunity of Roosevelt’s
fall from power. For this, leading Fabian Society eugenicist John Maynard
Keynes’ theories were used to first mimic the outward form of Roosevelt’s
program without any of the substance.
1932: The Rhodes Trust Hive in Canada Shifts Gears
Just as Roosevelt was coming to power in America in 1932, the
Rhodes Trust networks of Canada centering on Escott Reid, Frank Underhill,
Eugene Forsey, F.R. Scott, and David Lewis founded a self-described “Fabian
modeled think tank” customized for Canada known as the League for Social
Reconstruction (LSR). Reid, Forsey, Scott and Lewis were all Rhodes Scholars
while Underhill was an Oxford trained Fabian who was tutored by Harold Laski
and G.B. Shaw at Balliol College. The avowed intention of the group was to institute
a system of “scientific management of society” under Fabian precepts and
expressed itself in the group’s selecting of J.S. Woodsworth, another
Oxford-trained Fabian, to head the new Cooperative Commonwealth Federation
(CCF) as an outgrowth of the LSR. The CCF called for the complete destruction
of capitalism in its Regina Manifesto of 1933. Woodsworth, an avowed
eugenicist, vigorously endorsed the passage of Alberta’s 1927 sterilization
laws to eliminate the unfit (32). Following the gospel of his Fabian mentors
H.G. Wells and G.B. Shaw, Woodsworth even advocated the abolishment of personal
property. At its heart the CCF was not your typical “socialism”, but merely
fascism with a “scientific” socialist face.
Knowing that a fearful mob tends to fall into extremes, the
CIIA’s creation of a new polarized left and right did not produce the result as
it should have. Under the logic of empire, the abysmal failure of the “right”
wing conservative party of Prime Minister R.B. Bennett (1930-1935), should have
created the conditions for a radical left turn by the time the CCF had been
formed. Unemployment was over 25%, money tightening policies were choking what
little production still existed and Bennett’s typically anti-American Tory
stance was blocking any potential for increasing trade with the United States.
But something wasn’t working for the Empire’s agenda. While the
political seeds for a “scientific socialist” world government were being planted
on pace in Canada, the cultural fear and despair necessary for such programs to
take root willingly by the choice of the masses were no longer in place.
Indeed, the Canadian population was so inspired by the weekly Roosevelt
Fireside Chats broadcast across the border, scattered with newspaper reports of
inspiring.
New Deal projects, that hope for a better future and a national
solution to the chaos of the Great Depression was close enough at hand
such that no great polarization could occur. As such, the blind acceptance of a
Woodsworth-CCF scientific dictatorship run by agents of Rhodes’s nightmare was
avoided.
FDR’s power in the minds of the Canadian population forced even
the radical anti-American blue-Tory Government of R.B. Bennett to eventually
adapt to the language of the New Deal by trying to copy the U.S. program in a
last ditch effort to save the 1935 election. This Delphic program was known as
Bennett’s “New Deal for Canada” platform. The platform was a failure, as the
program laid out by Bennett had two grave errors:
1) Promoting a vast array of social welfare proposals (ie:
minimum wage, health insurance, unemployment insurance, expanded pension plan,
minimum hours for the work week) but lacking any large scale nation building
measures which defined the American success and gave meaning to the welfare
measures, the Bennett knock-off simply copied the form without any of the
substance of the true New Deal. The closest approximation to infrastructure
programs involved slave labour driven “work camps” paying 25 cents per day
which used and abused young desperate men so that piecemeal roads and patchwork
building could occur devoid of any national mission (33).
2) The national credit system employed by Roosevelt through his
understanding of American System thinkers as Alexander Hamilton and Abraham
Lincoln was entirely absent from the mind of Bennett and his civil servants.
While the creation of the Bank of Canada modeled on the privatized system of
England’s Central Bank, was established in 1935 after an extensive Royal
Commission run by Lord Macmillan (begun in 1933), its constitutional and
structural mandate was designed to merely centralize control for the management
of already existent wealth under the control of monetarist/accounting
principles… not the creation of new wealth. This institution was designed as
inherently monetarist/Keynesian, NOT Rooseveltian. Without a proper
American styled credit system in place which tied credit to the increase of the
productive powers of labour, then any large investments, even the superficial
ones proposed by Bennett’s New Deal were doomed to failure. After the
Conservative Party’s 1935 decimation at the hands of the Liberals, Bennett soon
retired permanently to Britain, accepting a title of nobility as Viscount.
With a revival of the American System under Roosevelt, we can
see why the Canadian culture was not induced to fall into the spider web set by
London. However we have yet to explain how the CIIA/Rhodes Trust networks were
prevented from fully taking over control of Canada’s foreign policy during the
remainder of the 1930s.
The Laurier Liberals Rise again 1935-1940
On October 1935, the Liberals still under the leadership of
Mackenzie King returned to power in Canadian politics attempting to gain a
foothold amidst the two British controlled extremes of the left-wing CCF and
right-wing Conservatives. At this point, Vincent Massey left his three year
post as President of the Liberal Party to occupy his new position as the High
Commissioner to Britain bringing into his staff such Oxford protégés as Lester
B. Pearson as his personal secretary, as well as Rhodes Scholars George
Ignatieff and Escott Reid. While most modern historians (often affiliated with
the CIIA such as John English and Jack Granatstein (34) have held that the
influx of Oxford men into the Department of External Affairs (DEA) was
catalyzed by O.D. Skelton, the evidence demonstrates that none other than
Vincent Massey himself and the CIIA networks were the true leaders in
this process against the better intention of O.D. Skelton. The
popular thesis cooked up by Granastein and his ilk, has merely been a mythology
maintained in order to hide Canada’s true nation building heritage from present
generations, as the following evidence will demonstrate.
While the CIIA had built up a large array of high level
intellectuals which had successfully installed themselves at controlling nodes
of all major universities across Canada, unlike its counterparts in the United
States or Britain, the CIIA had been unsuccessful at permeating the Department
of External Affairs (DEA). This was caused in large measure by the return of
Oscar Skelton as Undersecretary of the DEA working alongside the Minister of
External Affairs Mackenzie King. King was the only Prime Minister to occupy
both posts simultaneously in Canadian history. Historian Adam Chapnick
describes the suspicions of King and Skelton to CIIA infiltration in the
following terms:
“He shared his prime minister’s suspicions of Britain’s
political leadership and had never forgotten that following the British blindly
into battle in 1914 had nearly destroyed his country… Skelton became the leader
of “the isolationist intelligentsia” in the East Block”(35). This
distrust was demonstrated in the words of the Prime Minister, who spoke to the
Canadian population after the Imperial Conference of 1937 saying: “Those who
looked to the conference to devise and formulate a joint imperial policy on
foreign affairs defense or trade will find nothing to fulfill their
expectations” (36).
As chaos began to spread and the echos of war could be heard,
cracks began to appear in Skelton’s policy of keeping the CIIA nest from taking
over Canadian foreign policy. In a diary entry of May 20, 1938, Skelton wrote
the following ominous words:
“The British are doing their best to have the Czechs sacrifice
themselves on the altar of European peace… apparently the French are softening
in resistance. The Prime Minister said in council there seemed almost unanimous
recognition of (the) impossibility of our staying out if Britain goes in: my 14
years effort here wasted” (37).
Chapnick describes the irony of the RIIA’s success in
coordinating post war planning through the British Foreign Office as early as
1939, yet was unable to make any headway for similar planning in their Canadian
branch:
“While Mackenzie King was bracing his country for the
possibility of war, the RIIA’s world-order preparatory group held its first
meeting at Chatham House on 17 July 1939. The discussion emphasized the
importance of maintaining the rule of law in international relations. Unlike
the CIIA, which struggled to be heard in Ottawa through much of 1941, the RIIA
had already established close links to the government in London. Its impact was
evident in October 1939 when Lord Lothian [aka: Philip Kerr], the British
ambassador in Washington, alluded publicly to a future global federation. His
comments foresaw an international order in which regional organizations would
police the world under the umbrella of a unifying executive body.“ (38)
Historian Denis Stairs relates Philip Kerr`s frustration with
Skelton`s influence on Mackenzie King when he wrote that “Kerr once
pointedly observed to Vincent Massey that it “would be better if Skelton did
not regard co-operation with anyone as a confession of inferiority”. Massey
reported later in his memoirs that he agreed with the
assessment.” (39) Massey, an enemy of Skelton since the 1923
Imperial Conference referred to Skelton in his diaries as “Herr Doktor
Skelton”.
Upon the mysterious deaths of O.D. Skelton and Ernest Lapointe
in 1941 (40), the gates holding back the CIIA’s hordes began to be lifted as
Massey’s young recruit Norman Robertson (a Rhodes Scholar), was quickly
installed as Skelton’s replacement as Undersecretary of External Affairs. With
this veritable coup, things quickly changed for the CIIA’s role in shaping
Canada’s foreign policy. Chapnick describes the situation in the following
terms:
“Ironically, just as the CIIA abandoned its faith in the
Canadian government, Norman Robertson finally began to mobilize the Department
of External Affairs. Since wartime restrictions prevented him from hiring the
additional staff necessary to pursue an internationalist agenda in the
traditional way, he sought temporary help from his former academic colleagues.
Himself a University of British Columbia graduate, Robertson first asked the
professor of political science and economics Henry Angus to move to Ottawa and
assume the position of departmental “special assistant.” Angus was a member of
the CIIA and had studied the Versailles settlement in depth.
He was expected to contribute constructively to postwar
discussions. George Glazebrook, known to Pearson from the History Department of
the University of Toronto, soon joined him. Glazebrook had sat on the CIIA
research committee that had been tasked with looking into the shape of the
postwar world. In all, approximately twenty university professors eventually worked
for External Affairs during the war, nearly all of whom had direct or at least
indirect ties to the CIIA. The recruitment of these academics created a
planning infrastructure within the Canadian civil service that was similar to
those already established in Great Britain and the United States. Two years
after the Anglo-American process of planning the postwar order had started,
Canada was finally taking its first small step forward.” (41)
With the takeover of Canada’s foreign policy-making apparatus in
the Department of External Affairs by the CIIA, Canada’s new program of the
“Third Way” was set in place by the likes of Escott Reid, Lester Pearson, and
later Pierre Elliot Trudeau. Under this program, Canada’s role in the post War
world served as a counterweight to the bipolar Cold War dynamic of Mutually
Assured Annihilation. Wherever possible Canada would disrupt America by
befriending Communist Countries, while Britain’s Delphic foreign policy became
one of closely mimicking the USA. The Third Way was described
later by Pierre Trudeau when asked of his foreign policy approach as “the
creation of counter-weights”. All this was done not for interests of
Canada, a nation whose birth had become tragically aborted but in the service
of the British Empire.
To be continued next week…
BIO: Matthew J.L. Ehret is a
journalist, lecturer and founder of the Canadian Patriot Review. He
is an author with The Duran, Strategic Culture Foundation, Fort Russ. His works
have been published in Zero Hedge, Executive Intelligence Review, Global Times,
Asia Times, L.A. Review of Books, and Sott.net. Matthew has also published the
book “The
Time has Come for Canada to Join the New Silk Road” and three
volumes of the Untold History of Canada (available on untoldhistory.canadianpatriot.org).
He can be reached at matt.ehret@tutamail.com
End notes
(1) Robert D. Ainsworth, The American System in Canada, The
Canadian Patriot, Special Edition, 2012, p.32
(2) Isaac Buchanan, Relations of the Industry of Canada with the Mother Country and the United States, 1864, p.22
(3) Robert D. Ainsworth, The End of an Era: Laurier and the Election of 1911, University of Ottawa, 2009
(4) O.D. Skelton, The Life of Sir Wilfrid Laurier, p. 510
(5) Milner to J.S. Sanders, 2 Jan. 1909 cited in “The Round Table Movement and Imperial Union” by John Kendle, University of Toronto Press, 1975, p.55
(6) Carroll Quigley, The Anglo-American Establishment, New York, Books in Focus, 1981 www.archive.org/details/TheAnglo-americanEstablishment
(7) Carroll Quigley, The Anglo American Establishment, p. 5
(8) George Parkin, Imperial Federation: The Problem of National Unity, Macmillan and Co., London, 1892, preface VIII
(9) Ibid, p.7
(10) After taking up his governorship of South Africa, Milner wrote to Parkin: “My life has been greatly influenced by your ideas and in my new post I shall feel more than ever the need of your enthusiasm and broad hopeful view of the Imperial future”, Milner to Parkin, 28 April, Headlam, The Milner Papers, I, 42,
(11) W.T.Stead by E.T Cook, The Contemporary Review, June 1912, reprinted in Frederick Whyte, The Life of W.T. Stead, London, 1925, vol. 2, p.353-356
(12) Quigley, Anglo American Establishment, p. 32
(13) Rotberg, The Founder, pp. 101, 102. & Niall Ferguson, The House of Rothschild: The World’s Banker, 1848–1998, Penguin Books, 2000
(14) Quigley, ibid, p.31
(15) Notable Coefficients who were also be Fabians: Lord Alfred Milner, Sir Arthur Balfour, Lord Robert Cecil, Lord Bertrand Russell, H.G. Wells (protégé of Thomas Huxley), Leo .S Amery and Sir Edward Grey
(16) While Oxford and LSE have tended to produce the “doers”, the higher level “ideas” men of the Empire have tended to be conditioned at Cambridge
(17) The earliest incarnation of Canada’s “local oligarchy”, whose currents are still felt through the oligarchical structures of Canada, was named the “Family Compact”, formed officially during the War of 1812 by loyalist cliques who both left America, pre-existent loyalists from the War of 1776, and British aristocrats newly landed in Canada. Its legacy involved the creation of instruments for the imperial indoctrination of young elites such as King’s College (f.1827) and Upper Canada College (f.1829) along with the Bank of Upper Canada, all of which were run by the Compact’s leader, and Bishop for the Church of England in Canada, John Strachan. UCC was designed explicitly to be a ‘feeder school’ to King’s College (which was to take over full control of UCC in 1837 and later became re-named to “The University of Toronto”. The Compact would be forced to re-organize itself after the 1837 Rebellions of Upper and Lower Canada, led by William Lyon Mackenzie, and Louis-Joseph Papineau. Mackenzie’s grandson was Prime Minister William Lyon Mackenzie King. The re-organization of the Family Compact would result in the fraudulent Union of Upper and Lower Canada in 1840 and the promotion of the slavish belief in “Responsible Government” instead of true independence. It was from this current that George Parkin would arise.
(18) Carrol Quigley, Roundtable Group in Canada, Canadian Historical Review sept 1962, p.213
(19) Rockefeller, Carnegie and Canada: American Philanthropy and the Arts and Letters in Canada, 2005 by Jeffrey Brison demonstrates in detail the ironic role which “American” philanthropic foundations served in cultivating a largely anti-American identity for Canadians. The responsibility to fund the arts and humanities fell fully under the authority of the Canadian Government by 1957 with the creation of the Canada Council, a centralized cultural control center catalyzed by the Royal Commission on National Development in the Arts, Letters and Science (1949-1951), chaired by Vincent Massey. The first CIIA run commission was the Newton-Sirois Royal Commission of 1935-1937, led by CIIA President Newton and was a complete failure.
(20) It is of note that this time frame is also bookended by the death of the last American System President and Lincoln follower William McKinley and the emergence into power of American System and Lincoln follower Franklin Delano Roosevelt. In the interim 3 decades, every single president, barring President Harding who died under a mysterious case of food poisoning in office, were demonstrated to have been anglophile puppets of the British Empire.
(21) Sir Edward Grigg to Hitchens, 15 December 1931, cited in The Round Table Movement and Imperial Union, by Kendle, p. 284
(22) Cited in Canada and the British World, by Philip Buckner, UBC Press, 2007, p.266
(23) William Mackenzie King himself has always been a paradoxical character in Canadian history. Living under the domineering shadow of his mother’s eye (even long after her death), King was literally possessed by a drive to bring honor back to his family after his grandfather William Lyon Mackenzie, had led the thwarted Upper Canada Rebellion of 1838. King had the admirable quality of being a man possessed of a principled will and sense of divine mission on earth, yet sadly an irrational tendency to speak to his friends and family long after they had died. It was this irrationally mystical profile that was capitalized on while King had lived in London, visiting the prolific parapsychology operations and affiliated mediums run by Roundtable leaders as W.T. Stead. King’s penchant for bad judgement was manifest throughout his life, especially seen as he was hired by the Rockefeller Foundation from 1914-1918 to help John D. Rockefeller Jr. resolve problems with striking miners in the USA. It was through King’s mediation that the farcical policy of the “Company Union” was created. Skelton’s particular frustration with King’s flaky character was evidenced in a letter to his wife during the 1926 Imperial Conference when Skelton wrote: “the fact that certain other people [King] give all their time to dining and talking with ‘Lord’ this or ‘Lady’ that and to diary writing and 5 minutes a day to prepare for conference matters makes everything pretty hard.”, [citation from Lapointe and Quebec’s Influence on Canada’s Foreign Policy, p. 57] (24) W. Grant to Sir Maurice Hankey, Oct., 1925, W.L. Grant archives, vol.5, Citation from Claude Bissel’s, The Imperial Canadian vol 1. William Grant was also President of Upper Canada College, Director of the Massey Foundation.
(25) King Diary June 1940, cited in Ernest Lapointe and Quebec’s Influence on Canadian Foreign Policy by John MacFarlane, University of Toronto Press, 1999, p.124
(26) King Diary, Feb. 6, 1941 cited in Ernest Lapointe and Quebec’s Influence, p.124
(27) Skelton quote from Skelton papers, vol 11, file 1197, diary, 22 October 1923. King quote from King Diary Sept. 11, 1929. Both cited in Ernest Lapointe and Quebec’s Influence, p.55
(28) The Rowell-Sirois Commission attempted to centralize much of the fragmented Canadian system, modelled on effectively socialist terms. The federalizing of provincial debts and obligations was among the various proposals which attempted to mimic the outward form of FDR’s American System policies, but without any of the substance. Due in large measure to the resistance by Quebec, Alberta and B.C, this commission failed completely at achieving its agenda.
(29) Citation from Reid bio
(30) General Smedly Darlington Butler, War is a Racket, Roundtable Press Inc., 1935
(31) “I appeared before the Congressional Committee, the highest representation of the American people under subpoena to tell what I knew about activities which I believe might lead to an attempt to set up a fascist dictatorship… the upshot of the whole thing was that I was to pose to lead an organization of 500 000 men which would be able to take over the functions of government” -Gen. Smedley Butler, November 1933. Video extract is viewable on www.larouchepac.com/1932
(32) Pierre Beaudry, Synarchy Movement of Empire Book II, p.50
(33) Little known today, Alberta was the first Canadian province to pass sterilization laws in 1927 (the other being British Columbia which did the same in 1932). These provinces followed the 32 American States which had done the same beginning with Indiana in 1909.The promotion of their passage, the financing of the statistical based science promoting them was funded by the two biggest “philanthropic” organizations in the world: The Carnegie Foundation and the Rockefeller Corporation. Neither organization was truly American however, and were merely doing the bidding of their London masters. Later, another LSE trained Fabian named Tommy Douglas replaced Woodsworth as the leader of the CCF. Tommy Douglas, the father of Canadian universal healthcare, was a devout eugenicist, writing his 1933 masters thesis on “Problems of the Sub-Normal Family” while studying at the Fabian run London School of Economics. Most defenders of Douglas applaud him for having dropped his pro-eugenics philosophy after visiting Nazi Germany in 1936 and evidenced by the fact that Premier Douglas did not implement proposed 1944 sterilization laws in Saskatchewan when the opportunity arose. This defense is ill-founded, as eugenics was already deemed too hot to push publicly, evidenced by the pro-eugenics blueprint which Julian Huxley’s 1946 founding document of UNESCO lays out [see pg. 39 for exerpt]. The Universal Healthcare reform carried out by Douglas has a much darker intention which must be re-evaluated under this new light. More on this subject can be found in A Race of our Own: Eugenics and Canada 1894-1946 and in the appendix to this report.
(34) See Rick Sander’s The Ugly Truth of General McNaughton for more on the Canadian slave labour camps in The Canadian Patriot #5, 2013
(35) Jack Granatstein serves as Rowell Jackman Resident Fellow of the CIIA, while John English served as the CIIA Vice President from 1988-1990 and President from 1990-1992. W.L. Morton, another major authority on this segment of history is a Rhodes Scholar whose works have been published by the CIIA. Ironically (but lawfully) Anti-American Tory historian Donald Creighton’s career was largely funded directly by continuous grants from the Rockefeller Foundation until that burden was relieved by Vincent Massey’s British modelled Canada Council in 1957.
(36) Adam Chapnick, The Middle Power Project: Canada and the Founding of the United Nations, UBC Press, 2005, p.9
(37) Bruce Hutchison, The Incredible Canadian, Hunter Rose ltd., Toronto, 1959, pg.229
(38) O.D. Skelton Archive, Diary entry, Friday May 20, 1938, vol. 13, MG30D33
(39) Chapnick, Ibid. p.9
(40) Denis Stairs, The Menace of General Ideas in the Making and Conduct of Canadian Foreign Policy
(41) Skelton died in a car accident in January 1941 while Ernest Lapointe died in November 1941. Both men had a profound influence on King, and resisted Canada’s early involvement in the war, as it was understood by both to be another case of British intrigues gone awry.
(42) Chapnick, ibid. p. 19
(2) Isaac Buchanan, Relations of the Industry of Canada with the Mother Country and the United States, 1864, p.22
(3) Robert D. Ainsworth, The End of an Era: Laurier and the Election of 1911, University of Ottawa, 2009
(4) O.D. Skelton, The Life of Sir Wilfrid Laurier, p. 510
(5) Milner to J.S. Sanders, 2 Jan. 1909 cited in “The Round Table Movement and Imperial Union” by John Kendle, University of Toronto Press, 1975, p.55
(6) Carroll Quigley, The Anglo-American Establishment, New York, Books in Focus, 1981 www.archive.org/details/TheAnglo-americanEstablishment
(7) Carroll Quigley, The Anglo American Establishment, p. 5
(8) George Parkin, Imperial Federation: The Problem of National Unity, Macmillan and Co., London, 1892, preface VIII
(9) Ibid, p.7
(10) After taking up his governorship of South Africa, Milner wrote to Parkin: “My life has been greatly influenced by your ideas and in my new post I shall feel more than ever the need of your enthusiasm and broad hopeful view of the Imperial future”, Milner to Parkin, 28 April, Headlam, The Milner Papers, I, 42,
(11) W.T.Stead by E.T Cook, The Contemporary Review, June 1912, reprinted in Frederick Whyte, The Life of W.T. Stead, London, 1925, vol. 2, p.353-356
(12) Quigley, Anglo American Establishment, p. 32
(13) Rotberg, The Founder, pp. 101, 102. & Niall Ferguson, The House of Rothschild: The World’s Banker, 1848–1998, Penguin Books, 2000
(14) Quigley, ibid, p.31
(15) Notable Coefficients who were also be Fabians: Lord Alfred Milner, Sir Arthur Balfour, Lord Robert Cecil, Lord Bertrand Russell, H.G. Wells (protégé of Thomas Huxley), Leo .S Amery and Sir Edward Grey
(16) While Oxford and LSE have tended to produce the “doers”, the higher level “ideas” men of the Empire have tended to be conditioned at Cambridge
(17) The earliest incarnation of Canada’s “local oligarchy”, whose currents are still felt through the oligarchical structures of Canada, was named the “Family Compact”, formed officially during the War of 1812 by loyalist cliques who both left America, pre-existent loyalists from the War of 1776, and British aristocrats newly landed in Canada. Its legacy involved the creation of instruments for the imperial indoctrination of young elites such as King’s College (f.1827) and Upper Canada College (f.1829) along with the Bank of Upper Canada, all of which were run by the Compact’s leader, and Bishop for the Church of England in Canada, John Strachan. UCC was designed explicitly to be a ‘feeder school’ to King’s College (which was to take over full control of UCC in 1837 and later became re-named to “The University of Toronto”. The Compact would be forced to re-organize itself after the 1837 Rebellions of Upper and Lower Canada, led by William Lyon Mackenzie, and Louis-Joseph Papineau. Mackenzie’s grandson was Prime Minister William Lyon Mackenzie King. The re-organization of the Family Compact would result in the fraudulent Union of Upper and Lower Canada in 1840 and the promotion of the slavish belief in “Responsible Government” instead of true independence. It was from this current that George Parkin would arise.
(18) Carrol Quigley, Roundtable Group in Canada, Canadian Historical Review sept 1962, p.213
(19) Rockefeller, Carnegie and Canada: American Philanthropy and the Arts and Letters in Canada, 2005 by Jeffrey Brison demonstrates in detail the ironic role which “American” philanthropic foundations served in cultivating a largely anti-American identity for Canadians. The responsibility to fund the arts and humanities fell fully under the authority of the Canadian Government by 1957 with the creation of the Canada Council, a centralized cultural control center catalyzed by the Royal Commission on National Development in the Arts, Letters and Science (1949-1951), chaired by Vincent Massey. The first CIIA run commission was the Newton-Sirois Royal Commission of 1935-1937, led by CIIA President Newton and was a complete failure.
(20) It is of note that this time frame is also bookended by the death of the last American System President and Lincoln follower William McKinley and the emergence into power of American System and Lincoln follower Franklin Delano Roosevelt. In the interim 3 decades, every single president, barring President Harding who died under a mysterious case of food poisoning in office, were demonstrated to have been anglophile puppets of the British Empire.
(21) Sir Edward Grigg to Hitchens, 15 December 1931, cited in The Round Table Movement and Imperial Union, by Kendle, p. 284
(22) Cited in Canada and the British World, by Philip Buckner, UBC Press, 2007, p.266
(23) William Mackenzie King himself has always been a paradoxical character in Canadian history. Living under the domineering shadow of his mother’s eye (even long after her death), King was literally possessed by a drive to bring honor back to his family after his grandfather William Lyon Mackenzie, had led the thwarted Upper Canada Rebellion of 1838. King had the admirable quality of being a man possessed of a principled will and sense of divine mission on earth, yet sadly an irrational tendency to speak to his friends and family long after they had died. It was this irrationally mystical profile that was capitalized on while King had lived in London, visiting the prolific parapsychology operations and affiliated mediums run by Roundtable leaders as W.T. Stead. King’s penchant for bad judgement was manifest throughout his life, especially seen as he was hired by the Rockefeller Foundation from 1914-1918 to help John D. Rockefeller Jr. resolve problems with striking miners in the USA. It was through King’s mediation that the farcical policy of the “Company Union” was created. Skelton’s particular frustration with King’s flaky character was evidenced in a letter to his wife during the 1926 Imperial Conference when Skelton wrote: “the fact that certain other people [King] give all their time to dining and talking with ‘Lord’ this or ‘Lady’ that and to diary writing and 5 minutes a day to prepare for conference matters makes everything pretty hard.”, [citation from Lapointe and Quebec’s Influence on Canada’s Foreign Policy, p. 57] (24) W. Grant to Sir Maurice Hankey, Oct., 1925, W.L. Grant archives, vol.5, Citation from Claude Bissel’s, The Imperial Canadian vol 1. William Grant was also President of Upper Canada College, Director of the Massey Foundation.
(25) King Diary June 1940, cited in Ernest Lapointe and Quebec’s Influence on Canadian Foreign Policy by John MacFarlane, University of Toronto Press, 1999, p.124
(26) King Diary, Feb. 6, 1941 cited in Ernest Lapointe and Quebec’s Influence, p.124
(27) Skelton quote from Skelton papers, vol 11, file 1197, diary, 22 October 1923. King quote from King Diary Sept. 11, 1929. Both cited in Ernest Lapointe and Quebec’s Influence, p.55
(28) The Rowell-Sirois Commission attempted to centralize much of the fragmented Canadian system, modelled on effectively socialist terms. The federalizing of provincial debts and obligations was among the various proposals which attempted to mimic the outward form of FDR’s American System policies, but without any of the substance. Due in large measure to the resistance by Quebec, Alberta and B.C, this commission failed completely at achieving its agenda.
(29) Citation from Reid bio
(30) General Smedly Darlington Butler, War is a Racket, Roundtable Press Inc., 1935
(31) “I appeared before the Congressional Committee, the highest representation of the American people under subpoena to tell what I knew about activities which I believe might lead to an attempt to set up a fascist dictatorship… the upshot of the whole thing was that I was to pose to lead an organization of 500 000 men which would be able to take over the functions of government” -Gen. Smedley Butler, November 1933. Video extract is viewable on www.larouchepac.com/1932
(32) Pierre Beaudry, Synarchy Movement of Empire Book II, p.50
(33) Little known today, Alberta was the first Canadian province to pass sterilization laws in 1927 (the other being British Columbia which did the same in 1932). These provinces followed the 32 American States which had done the same beginning with Indiana in 1909.The promotion of their passage, the financing of the statistical based science promoting them was funded by the two biggest “philanthropic” organizations in the world: The Carnegie Foundation and the Rockefeller Corporation. Neither organization was truly American however, and were merely doing the bidding of their London masters. Later, another LSE trained Fabian named Tommy Douglas replaced Woodsworth as the leader of the CCF. Tommy Douglas, the father of Canadian universal healthcare, was a devout eugenicist, writing his 1933 masters thesis on “Problems of the Sub-Normal Family” while studying at the Fabian run London School of Economics. Most defenders of Douglas applaud him for having dropped his pro-eugenics philosophy after visiting Nazi Germany in 1936 and evidenced by the fact that Premier Douglas did not implement proposed 1944 sterilization laws in Saskatchewan when the opportunity arose. This defense is ill-founded, as eugenics was already deemed too hot to push publicly, evidenced by the pro-eugenics blueprint which Julian Huxley’s 1946 founding document of UNESCO lays out [see pg. 39 for exerpt]. The Universal Healthcare reform carried out by Douglas has a much darker intention which must be re-evaluated under this new light. More on this subject can be found in A Race of our Own: Eugenics and Canada 1894-1946 and in the appendix to this report.
(34) See Rick Sander’s The Ugly Truth of General McNaughton for more on the Canadian slave labour camps in The Canadian Patriot #5, 2013
(35) Jack Granatstein serves as Rowell Jackman Resident Fellow of the CIIA, while John English served as the CIIA Vice President from 1988-1990 and President from 1990-1992. W.L. Morton, another major authority on this segment of history is a Rhodes Scholar whose works have been published by the CIIA. Ironically (but lawfully) Anti-American Tory historian Donald Creighton’s career was largely funded directly by continuous grants from the Rockefeller Foundation until that burden was relieved by Vincent Massey’s British modelled Canada Council in 1957.
(36) Adam Chapnick, The Middle Power Project: Canada and the Founding of the United Nations, UBC Press, 2005, p.9
(37) Bruce Hutchison, The Incredible Canadian, Hunter Rose ltd., Toronto, 1959, pg.229
(38) O.D. Skelton Archive, Diary entry, Friday May 20, 1938, vol. 13, MG30D33
(39) Chapnick, Ibid. p.9
(40) Denis Stairs, The Menace of General Ideas in the Making and Conduct of Canadian Foreign Policy
(41) Skelton died in a car accident in January 1941 while Ernest Lapointe died in November 1941. Both men had a profound influence on King, and resisted Canada’s early involvement in the war, as it was understood by both to be another case of British intrigues gone awry.
(42) Chapnick, ibid. p. 19
Liked it? Take a second to
support The Duran on Patreon!
