We will examine part of an essay titled ‘The Hard Road To World Order" from a journal published by the CFR called Foreign Affairs. It is from April 1974. I will give my own analysis of various parts of this essay throughout. The purpose is to show how one think tank plays its role in a greater agenda carried out by multiple institutions and also to question the logic of that agenda.
First, let’s give context of what the publication Foreign Affairs is. The following is from their website, foreignaffairs.com
About Foreign Affairs
Since its founding in 1922, Foreign Affairs has been the leading forum for serious discussion of American foreign policy and global affairs. It is now a multiplatform media organization with a print magazine, a website, a mobile site, various apps and social media feeds, an event business, and more. Foreign Affairs is published by the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), a non-profit and nonpartisan membership organization dedicated to improving the understanding of U.S. foreign policy and international affairs through the free exchange of ideas.
Here is some info about the author of the article, Richard N. Gardner, from wikipedia.org.
Richard Newton Gardner (born July 9, 1927 in New York) served as the United States Ambassador to Spain and the United States Ambassador to Italy. He is currently a professor emeritus of law at Columbia Law School. Education Gardner attended Harvard, where he received an A.B. in economics in 1948. He attended Yale Law School, where he was the Note Editor for the Yale Law Journal.
After graduating from Yale in 1951, Gardner was a Rhodes Scholar, and received his Doctorate in economics from Oxford University in 1954. Professional career Gardner practiced law for three years in New York after finishing his doctorate at Oxford. He joined the Columbia faculty in 1957; he taught at Columbia until his retirement in 2012. Gardner was appointed by President Kennedy as the Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs in 1961, a position he held until 1965, when he was appointed by President Johnson as a senior adviser to the United States Ambassador to the United Nations.
After a year with the U.N., he served as a member of the President's Commission on International Trade and Investment Policy from 1970 to 1971. He served in various advisory positions in the U.N.. In 1977, he was appointed by President Carter as U.S. Ambassador to Italy, a position he held until 1981. President Clinton appointed Gardner as U.S. Ambassador to Spain, from 1993 to 1997. In 2000, he was a U.S. Public Delegate to the 55th U.N. General Assembly. He was a member of the Trilateral Commission from 1974 to 2005.
Note: the entire article is available at:
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/1974-04-01/hard-road-world-order
…….We are witnessing an outbreak of shortsighted nationalism that seems oblivious to the economic, political and moral implications of interdependence. Yet never has there been such widespread recognition by the world's intellectual leadership of the necessity for coöperation and planning on a truly global basis, beyond country, beyond region, especially beyond social system. Never has there been such an extraordinary growth in the constructive potential of transnational private organizations-not just multinational corporations but international associations of every kind in which like-minded persons around the world weave effective patterns of global action…….
My analysis: If he thinks nationalism is shortsighted, then what does he think of autonomous individualism? What are the economic, political, and moral implications that he’s speaking of? What does he mean by that? What is interdependence? What intellectual leadership? The leadership that leads to so much poverty, death, and injustice in the world? Why is global planning necessary? Who’s doing the planning and for what purpose? How will it effect YOU? Why should any of these so-called ‘intellectuals’ have so much influence over my life or yours? Where is the logic in that? Why should multinational corporations have so much power over everyone’s lives? What type of thoughs and ideals do these like-minded persons share? What type of effective patterns is he speaking of?
……As in the case of the U.S. Constitution, we are more likely to make progress by pressing the existing instrument to the outer limits of its potentialities through creative use, seeking amendments only on carefully selected matters where they seem both necessary and capable of adoption by the constitutionally required majority……
My analysis: So this private group is subverting U.S. law? Did you vote for this group? What does he mean by creative use?
…..If instant world government, Charter review, and a greatly strengthened International Court do not provide the answers, what hope for progress is there? The answer will not satisfy those who seek simple solutions to complex problems, but it comes down essentially to this: The hope for the foreseeable future lies, not in building up a few ambitious central institutions of universal membership and general jurisdiction as was envisaged at the end of the last war, but rather in the much more decentralized, disorderly and pragmatic process of inventing or adapting institutions of limited jurisdiction and selected membership to deal with specific problems on a case-by-case basis, as the necessity for coöperation is perceived by the relevant nations. Such institutions of limited jurisdiction will have a better chance of doing what must be done to make a "rule of law" possible among nations-providing methods for changing the law and enforcing it as it changes and developing the perception of common interests that is the prerequisite for successful coöperation……
My analysis: What nations are ‘relevant’? Are there irrelevant nations? This implies that there are millions (possibly billions) of ‘irrelevant people’. Notice he says ‘perception’ of common interests. This makes it sound as if common interests are not important in the final decision making process. If this is true, then the CFR and related institutions, it would appear, use perception management as a method to achieve final objectives in the ‘relevant nations’ favor. Do you, the reader, really want these types of people and institutions having so much power over you, your family, and your local area? WE MUST USE OUR OWN AUTONOMOUS POWER AS INDIVIDUALS TO BUILD DIFFERENT REALITIES, THROUGH VOLUNTARY ASSOCIATIONS, WHICH MAKE THE CENTRALIZED COERCIVE NIGHTMARE OF THE OLIGARCHS IRRELEVANT.
End Part 1
I originally published this analysis in my book "Making The Oligarchy Obsolete".
To read more, please visit my blog @
makingtheoligarchyobsolete.blogspot.com
If you'd like a paperback of the entire book go to:
http://www.lulu.com/shop/todd-borho/making-the-oligarchy-obsolete-defining-problems-of-coercion-and-seeking-voluntary-solutions/paperback/product-22398143.html