MANAGING "LIBERAL DEMOCRACY"
The origins, purpose and power of the Council on Foreign Relations
When examining the liberal-global regime it is important to note that there is no difference between foreign and domestic policy. Regime change has been undertaken by elite direction for over a hundred years. This is the reason you no longer recognise the world as your own. It has been taken from you, by design.
The liberal democratic project has been managed for a century. This is done through manufacturing belief in itself via the mobilisation of all aspects of cultural production, including and not limited to the messaging received by its populations through mass media.
The regime change you have witnessed abroad has taken place at home. Liberal democracy is itself a regime change operation on a global scale.
The establishment of the Council on Foreign Relations in 1921 was the founding of the institution which would manage the transition to global liberal democracy through waging war on the nature of reality at home and abroad.
The Council on Foreign Relations is the foundational management group of Project Global - that vast utopian effort by a hidden elite to replace our civilisation with a permanent world government. It is why our democracies have always been managed, and explains why there is no place like home, and why the remnants of the global system are now openly neither liberal - nor democratic - at all.
NARRATIVE POWER IN DECLINE
Before we examine the origins and nature of the management of liberal democracy, it is important to note the most obvious current example of both its enormous power and suicidal decline. These two factors are playing out now, as the remnants of the globalist liberal consensus struggle to combat their dissolving legitimacy with crackdowns and propaganda.
Britain, The European Union, Canada, Australia and New Zealand are the main relics of this abandoned project of global domination, to be secured by the subversion of nations at home and abroad.
The liberal global system has been abandoned by the United States as it has failed to achieve its goal of worldwide hegemony.
Hard economic, military and industrial limits mean Project Global is no longer possible. This leaves the remnant states captive to the liberal consensus in a fatal bind.
To secure their power they must practise openly what they formerly practised in private: the coordinated suppression of democracy through censorship, propaganda, and the nullification of elections.
The European “firewall” against populism is the open cancellation of democracy. The Romanian Presidential election has been cancelled to prevent a counter-liberal, anti-war candidate from winning.
The German liberal consensus has united to lock out the AfD from government, who won 25 percent of the national vote.
The French have done the same to Marine Le Pen’s Rassemblement National. In Austria, the national-populist FPO came first in the election and is similarly prohibited from entering government. The result of these actions is to make these parties more and not less popular. Their success is a simple result of the fact that the liberal parties are declining in popularity - as a result of their policies of national suicide.
Britain too has a major democratic deficit. In its last election only half the eligible voters voted at all. Keir Starmer’s majority was won on a fraction of half the available franchise. His government has redoubled the commitment of the conservatives to the failed and tragic war in Ukraine, and refuses - along with all liberals - to reverse the mass migration policy pursued against the popular will for the last three decades.
The response of liberals to their critics is to demonise and imprison anyone who dares to complain. If you object to your life being ruined they will ruin your life.
This is the remedy of the liberal consensus for the millions of people who now demand a decent and sane life in place of the chaos they have created.
The liberal state is no longer legitimate as it is derelict in the basic duties of the state to provide security, prosperity and meaning to the nation.
The answer to this crisis of legitimacy is to craft a narrative of international crisis in order to distract the population from the fact their governments are destroying everything of value in their lives by design.
This is the reason for the war talk against Russia. The UK is seeking to lead a “coalition of the willing” in defiance of the outbreak of peace in Ukraine.
Some say this will provoke World War Three. To these people, and to you, I would say that liberal democracy has been managed by the creation of mass belief in narratives convenient to the ruling elite - and the talk of war with Russia is nothing more than that.
At a conference in Berlin in late 2023 the leading academic on the German military told generals that Europe’s diminished armies would be “washed away” by Russia following the outbreak of war. He said ammunition would run out in two weeks.
There is neither the military nor industrial capability in Europe for a war with the Russians. Should the Germans ditch the debt break and borrow a trillion euros to fund it, the remilitarisation of Germany would take at least fifteen years.
The liberal consensus is desperate to distract its populations from the enormous scandal looming in the wake of peace in Ukraine. When the shooting stops, the corruption will come out, and it will permanently destroy the reputations of every state and civil leader whose political capital was invested in the horrendous activities our money has been funding.
This is perhaps the worst of all the regime change wars in terms of the criminal activity it has financed.
When this is revealed populations will rightly ask why they were told this war was fought to make the world safe for democracy.
They will then ask what kind of democracy they live in.
Today’s chapter of my Brief History of Liberal Democracy explains some of the nature of that business.
What is the Council on Foreign Relations?
The Council on Foreign Relations is dedicated to manufacturing public opinion to support the global agenda directed by an elite.
Its interests can be explained in part by its initial membership. It coalesced in a 1919 meeting in Paris led by agents belonging to “The Inquiry” - the UK/US intelligence community which predated the CIA by almost thirty years.
How powerful was “The Inquiry” which would form the CFR? As Americans gathered for the Paris Peace Conference after the First World War,
The scholars of the Inquiry helped draw the borders of post World War I central Europe over tea at the Quai d’Orsay
In the early postwar summer, the CFR began to grow out of the management of Germany from Empire to Weimar liberal democracy. The first group calling itself the Council on Foreign Relations had begun to meet in Paris, in 1918.
But it was a more discreet club of New York financiers and international lawyers organized in June 1918 that most attracted the attention of the Americans from the Peace Conference. Headed by Elihu Root, the secretary of state under Theodore Roosevelt and a Nobel Peace Prize laureate, this select group called itself the Council on Foreign Relations.
It began with 108 members… “high-ranking officers of banking, manufacturing, trading and finance companies, together with many lawyers.
Continuing the Inquiry : The Council on Foreign Relations from 1921 to 1996
These “early Council members” promoted the forerunner of the United Nations.
Despite growing opposition to Wilson’s internationalism, the early Council members supported the League of Nations, but not necessarily on Wilson’s rationale.
Their concerns for world peace were not solely humanitarian - some were strictly business.
As Shepardson put it, they “were concerned primarily with the effect that the war and the treaty of peace might have on postwar business.” At an early meeting, for instance, several members stressed economic advantages that could flow from the League; others hastened to register on the record the argument that world peace was surely more important than immediate profits.
By the next year this discreet dinner group of globalist financiers had dissolved.
For whatever reasons, by April 1919 the members’ interest in the dinner meetings dwindled, and the Council went dormant.
The following month, The Inquiry led a new group which would combine and pursue the aims of the international management of world affairs.
On May 30, 1919, a little group of diplomats and scholars from Britain and the United States convened at the Hotel Majestic, billet of the British delegation, to discuss how their fellowship could be sustained after the peace.
They proposed a permanent Anglo-American Institute of International Affairs, with one branch in London, the other in New York.
The Council on Foreign relations would be founded by this group in 1921, along with its UK operation, now known as Chatham House. The split was necessary to conceal from the “post-Wilsonian” American public the close coordination of domestic and international policy between the London and New York branches of the New Inquiry.
The CFR was born out of this necessity.
On July 29, 1921, a New York certificate of incorporation was prepared and the new Council on Foreign Relations came into being.
As the CFR’s own website used to say, The Inquiry was a 1917 group tasked by Woodrow Wilson to prepare for the governance of a defeated German Empire. Their mission?
“To make the world safe for democracy”.
This was the slogan Wilson had used to persuade Americans to enter the First World War. It is still used today, to make the case for funding the war in Ukraine, and has been used many times at home and abroad to promote regime change.
On May 30, 1919, a little group of diplomats and scholars from Britain and the United States convened at the Hotel Majestic, billet of the British delegation, to discuss how their fellowship could be sustained after the peace.
They proposed a permanent Anglo-American Institute of International Affairs, with one branch in London, the other in New York.
“Continuing The Inquiry” - History of the Council on Foreign Relations
Founding members included the master propagandist Walter Lippmann, whose concept of creating public opinion to serve elite power was foundational to this new technocratic system of international governance.
You can read about Lippmann and his influence in Chapter One - A Brief History of Liberal Democracy
Secrecy - or “discretion” were a hallmark of CFR and Chatham House operations:
From its inception, the activities of the Council on Foreign Relations were private and confidential
The Council’s founding fathers appreciated that democracy involved the factor of public opinion, but they were uncertain at first about how such opinion was to be formed and expressed.
Lionel Curtis, a leading light in London’s Chatham House, had written that “right public opinion was mainly produced by a small number of people in real contact with the facts, who had thought out the issues involved.” The leadership of the New York Council concurred.
The other primary instrument toward this end, the first and always most visible of the Council’s projects, was an austere quarterly journal launched in September 1922, called Foreign Affairs.
The first head of the CFR Elihu Root- and one of its first members - John Foster Dulles -
“…were the first of more than a dozen American secretaries of state—past, present, and future at the time of their writing—to appear as authors over the coming decades in the pages of Foreign Affairs, along with many more of their counterparts among the world’s foreign ministers.”
As G William Domhoff has explained, the CFR was instrumental in arranging US intervention in Vietnam - and in “building the framework for the International Monetary Fund”. It has pursued the business of war as peace as a central pillar of its international strategy of global economic and cultural domination for the last hundred years.
Below the griftline:
Who’s Who of the CFR
Carnegie and the CFR
Popular Culture as Propaganda
Why We Live in a “Pseudo Reality”
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to Frank Wright to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.