FOUNDATIONS AND A CLOSE LOOK AT FORD
PART 2
By
Dennis L. Cuddy, Ph.D.
May 5, 2008
NewsWithViews.com
[Note:
Relevant to the recent news about the polygamist sect in Texas, does
it strike you as strange that a 16-year old girl brave enough to phone
from the compound can’t be found though government protection
is now available to her? On April 19, NBC News reported the possibility
the telephone call from the girl may have been a hoax, but then reported
that authorities say they acted legally as long as they “believed”
the call was real (read “Scott Henson: where’s the evidence
of abuse?” in THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS, April 23, 2008). The implications
of this are ominous. Someone can make an anonymous false accusation
against you, and this would give police the right to enter your premises
and go on a legal fishing expedition against you! Years ago, there was
a case involving removal of tax-exempt status from Bob Jones University
because of its policy prohibiting interracial dating according to their
faith. Though I
didn’t defend the policy, I did ask where was the racial discrimination
since blacks and whites attending the university agreed with the policy.
I further asked if the NAACP was now under the threat of losing its
tax-exempt status since its work is directed at helping one race? I
also warned this could be setting a precedent for denying Catholic churches
tax-exempt status because they don’t allow women to be priests,
and the same for orthodox Jewish synagogues which segregate by gender
in religious services. Today, could the government be using the clearly
horrible criminal acts of the religious leader of the compound in Texas
to set a precedent for a massive taking of children from parents of
some other religious or non-religious group simply because someone alleges
possible child abuse or neglect, however the government chooses to define
the latter term? What if there was some other religious sect which believed
in living (in terms of age and marriage, caring for children, etc.)
as did those in Biblical times? Would our government consider Mary and
Joseph criminals and forcibly remove Jesus from them? After all, wasn’t
Mary (and many girls in the U.S. before the 20th Century) “under
age” when they married?]
In 1968, Paul Ehrlich’s POPULATION BOMB, financed by the Ford Foundation and advocating population control, was published (in fiscal 1982 alone, the Ford Foundation spent 10.2 million dollars on population control). In this same year (1968), the Center for Educational Research and Innovation was created by the OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development) with the help of grants from the Ford Foundation and the Royal Dutch/Shell group of companies. The Center would print ALTERNATIVE EDUCATIONAL FUTURES IN THE UNITED STATES AND IN EUROPE (1972) in which New Age networker Willis Harman (Stanford University Research Institute, Planetary Citizens, and the Institute of Noetic Sciences) would assert: “It is not enough to be intellectually aware that at this point in history nationalism is a suicidal course…. Educational experiences must be contemplated which are akin to psychotherapy… that result in a felt realization of the inevitability of one inseparable world, and a felt shift in the most basic values and premises on which one builds one’s life. In a sense this means bringing something like ‘person-changing technology’ into the educational system (e.g., meditation, hypnosis, sensitivity training, psychodrama, yoga, etc.).”
Another “values-changing” leader supported by the Ford Foundation was Abraham Maslow, father of Third Force Humanistic Psychology (and a founder of the Association of Humanistic Psychology in 1962). In the second edition of Maslow’s TOWARD A PSYCHOLOGY OF BEING (1968, with a single left eye on the cover), he said: “I wish to acknowledge the fellowship given me by the Ford Foundation’s Fund for the Advancement of Education.” The Foundation’s fellowship was for a year to reflect upon and write about humanistic education, some of the results of which Maslow had published in “Some Educational Implications of the Humanistic Psychologies” (HARVARD EDUCATIONAL REVIEW, Fall 1968). The next year, PACE magazine (December 1969) published an interview with Maslow (president of the American Psychological Association at the time) in which he pronounced: “Young people are looking for the kind of certainties that the religions and traditions used to give them. Now the religions have cracked up, the traditions have cracked up. It is not only God is Dead but Marx is Dead and Freud and Dead and Darwin is Dead. They have no sources of values to go by. So they have to work everything out for themselves. This new humanistic revolution has an alternative source of values.”
The next year, on June 8, 1970, Maslow died, and about the same time, NEW DIRECTIONS IN TEACHING (Volume 2, Number 2, 1970) printed his “Humanistic Education Vs. Professional Education: Further Comments” (reprinted in THE JOURNAL OF HUMANISTIC PSYCHOLOGY, Summer 1979). In the article, he described a seminar which was “an especially important learning experience for me because I had just completed a year-long fellowship granted me by the Fund for the Advancement of Education of the Ford Foundation,” and he further stated: “I should point out that this challenging of authority is also having some effects that I consider beneficial. My students today, when I compare them with those of twenty-five years ago, are less nationalistic and more internationalistic… much less accepting of outworn institutions, etc…. a more mature person giving up childish ways of thinking in absolutes….”
Advertisement
Late in 1968 (November 28), THE HOUSTON TRIBUNE published Alice Widener’s article “Ford Foundation Politics,” quoting United Federation of Teachers president Albert Shanker as saying that the Ford Foundation “is investing heavily in every major organization that has influence over the educational policies of the city (New York). That fact should cause concern for all of us. Why are they doing it? They are doing it to influence the educational policies of the city.” On the same day, THE WANDERER published Edith Kermit Roosevelt’s nationally-syndicated column “Government Within A Government,” in which she related that Albert Shanker has charged that “a very substantial number” of members of the New York board of education “are in such great debt to the Ford Foundation that they cannot act independently.” Roosevelt also indicated that Shanker said that the Foundation ought to be treated as a “political lobby” and should lose its tax-exempt status and be “required to fully disclose the extent” of its “activities in this field.” Actually, according William H. McIlhany II, in THE TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS (1980): “The blatant partisonship of the groups for which Ford has provided the bulk of support since 1970 was so overwhelming that for one month in that year the I.R.S. was embarrassed into removing the Foundation’s tax-exempt status, but the bureaucratic pressures for its restoration were either too powerful or tempting to the service.”
In the March 31, 1969 edition of THE OREGONIAN is an article, “Students Rate Revolution as Primary Task,” in which Michael Klonsky, executive secretary of the radical Students for a Democratic Society (SDS), is reported to have said, “Our primary task is to build a Marxist-Leninist movement.” The relevance of this statement is that according to the February 25, 1971, “SDS Infiltrator Talks,” in THE VALLEY TIMES, David Gumaer was a former undercover police intelligence agent who had participated in SDS demonstrations and said he had “wondered where the money was coming from for all this activity, and soon discovered it came from radicals via the United Nations, the Rockefeller Foundation, the Ford Foundation, United Auto Workers, as well as cigar boxes of American money from the Cuban embassy.” What he asserted was basically confirmed by James Kirk, who while a student at the University of Chicago, had on behalf of the FBI become active in SDS, the Communist Party and other groups, and in 1970 testified before the House and Senate Internal Security Committees as follows: “Young people… have no idea that they are playing into the hands of the Establishment they claim to hate. The radicals think they’re fighting the forces of the super-rich, like Rockefeller and Ford, and don’t realize it is precisely such forces that are behind their own revolution, financing it, and using it for their own purposes.”
The power elite one-worlders believe that more, not less, government is the solution to the world’s problems, and in 1969 the Ford Foundation published a “think piece” titled PLANNING AND PARTICIPATION, in which Ford’s National Affairs Division director Mitchell Sviridoff told the American Institute of Planners: “The times do not call for shrinkage of the responsibilities or powers of government…. The world is too complex for an abatement of government powers. If anything, the role of government must be strengthened.” Sviridoff continued in the Foundation’s THE FORD FOUNDATION AND NATIONAL AFFAIRS (1971): “Our third main goal strengthening the capacity of government…. The fact is that the Ford Foundation and many others collaborate closely with government, especially in Washington. Very often federal agencies look to foundations to break new ground before the government is willing to embark on a collaborative effort.” Efforts like these facilitated the public-private partnerships we see today as part of the power elite’s plan.
During
this same period, the Ford Foundation received Bulgarian scientist Dr.
Georgi Lozanov to explain his “suggestology” method, which
draws from various specialties such as Raja Yoga, music, sleep-learning,
physiology, hypnosis, autogenics, parapsychology and drama. It is essentially
“applied” altered states of consciousness for various purposes.
According to Sheila Ostrander and Lynn Schroeder in
SUPERLEARNING (1979), the two authors had met Lozanov in the Institute
of Suggestology and Parapsychology in Bulgaria in 1968, and they wrote:
“We had scarcely gotten back to America, when suddenly in 1969,
though few Bulgarians were permitted to travel to the West, Dr. Lozanov
arrived in New York…. Something was certainly working for him.
On this and subsequent visits he made to America, we reviewed numerous
films on suggestopedia and suggestology, read his thesis and
many of his other publications, and saw the presentations for UNESCO
and the Ford Foundation.”
Internationally,
from 1969 to 1977, the Ford Foundation provided a grant for the publication
of PUBLIC PAPERS OF THE SECRETARIES-GENERAL OF THE UNITED NATIONS, including
those of U Thant talking about “the myth of the absolute sovereign
state” and “world citizens as they work steadfastly to usher
in the new world order.” Earlier it was mentioned that an official
of the Ford Foundation had attended a Bilderberg Group meeting, but
even more than that, the Ford Foundation (and the Rockefeller Foundation)
paid all the expenses for the Bilderberg meeting at Woodstock, Vermont
in 1971. The next year, on July 23-24, 1972, Ford Foundation president
McGeorge Bundy attended a 17-person planning group meeting at David
Rockefeller’s estate for the establishment of the Trilateral Commission.
And in January-February 1973, a formal funding proposal was submitted
to the Ford Foundation by Trilateral Commission representatives “to
support a major share of the intellectual and research aspect of the
Commission’s work and some of the administrative ‘selling’
aspects.” The result was that between June 30, 1974, and June
30, 1976, the Ford Foundation gave the Trilateral Commission
$500,000.
There was a growing concern during the next decades (1980s) that American students’ basic skills were lacking and that this would impact negatively upon the future workforce. Thomas Sticht had conducted major research on reading for the Ford Foundation (and the U.S. Army), and according to Lawrence Feinberg in THE WASHINGTON POST (August 17, 1987), Sticht along with David Harman said what may be crucial in the U.S. is the dependability of the labor force and how well it can be managed and trained, not its general education level although a small cadre of highly educated creative people is essential to growth.
|
Subscribe to the NewsWithViews Daily News Alerts! |
The same year (1987), the Ford Foundation (and the Rockefeller and Exxon Foundations) financed “The United States Prepares for its Future: Global Perspectives in Education, Report of the Study Commission on Global Education,” printed by Global Perspectives in Education (GPE, name later changed to the American Forum for Global Education). In the Foreword to the Report, New Age networker Harlan Cleveland (Rhodes Scholar, C.F.R. member and with the Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies) wrote: “A dozen years ago… teaching and learning ‘in global perspective’ was still exotic doctrine, threatening the orthodoxies of those who still thought of American citizenship as an amalgam of American history, American geography, American lifestyles and American ideas…. It now seems almost conventional to speak of American citizenship in the same breath with international interdependence… and the planetary environment.” For part one click below.
Click here for part -----> 1,
� 2008 Dennis Cuddy - All Rights Reserved
