Modus Operandi Of The Order

Memorandum Number Six:
Operations Of The Order

    In 1981 The Anglo American Establishment, by Carroll Quigley, was published in New York by a small anti-Establishment publisher. Quigley was formerly instructor at Princeton and Harvard and then Professor at the School of Foreign Service, Georgetown University. The publisher notes in his introduction that Quigley had been unable to find a major publisher for the manuscript. This is not surprising. The book blows the lid off the British equivalent of The Order.

    The Anglo American Establishment has nothing at all to do with the American establishment, which is hardly mentioned, but it has a lot to do with the British establishment. The publisher probably inserted the word "AMERICAN" into the title to enhance marketability in the States. Quigley describes in minute detail the historical operations of the British establishment controlled by a secret society and operating very much as The Order operates in the U.S. This is the real significance of Quigley's explosive book.

The Group

    The British secret society, known as "The Group" or just plain "US", was founded at Oxford University, much as The Order was founded at Yale, but without the Masonic mumbo jumbo. As we noted in Memorandum Five. the Group operates in a series of concentric circles and like The Order consists of old line families allied with private merchant bankers, known in the U.S. as investment bankers.

    Bearing in mind. the proven existence of The Group. the operations of The Order and the kind of penetration it has achieved cannot be explained by mere chance. By examining The Order's operations we can generate a picture of its objectives without access to any internal constitution or statement of objectives even if such exists. It may only be word of mouth.

    By contrast. The Group's objective is recorded in Cecil Rhodes' will. It was: The extension of British rule throughout the world, the perfecting of a system of emigration from the United Kingdom and of colonization by British subjects of all lands wherein the means of livelihood are attainable by energy. labor and enterprise ... and the ultimate recovery of the United States of America as an integral part of the British Empire.

    This objective is, of course. ridiculous and somewhat immature, but no less ridiculous and immature than the New World order objective of The Order. Yet The Group has controlled British policy for a hundred years and still does.Both The Group and The Order have been created by Anglophiles who want to pattern the world on a Hegelian-Anglo hybrid culture. Where the Latins, the Slavs and the Sino races fit is not considered, but clearly these cultures will be disinclined to become pawns of either the British Empire or New England Yankees. Even within the Commonwealth, a voluntary association of nations, it is unlikely that Canada, Australia and New Zealand would accept the constitutional bondage envisaged by Cecil Rhodes. Both secret organizations overlook, and there is a philosophic basis for this neglect, the natural right of any ethnic group, be it white, black or yellow, English, Slavic or Latin, to develop its own culture without coercion.

    Unlike this author, Quigley sympathizes with the ends of The Group, although he terms their methods despicable. Both The Group and The Order are unwilling or unable to bring about a global society by voluntary means, so they opted for coercion. To do this they have created wars and revolutions, they have ransacked public treasuries, they have oppressed, they have pillaged, they have lied - even to their own countrymen.

    How have they done this?

Modus Operandi Of The Order

    The activities of The Order are directed towards changing our society, -hanging the world, to bring about a New World Order. This will be a planned order with heavily restricted individual freedom, without Constitutional protection, without national boundaries or cultural distinction.

    We deduce this objective by examining and then summing up the actions of individual members: there has been a consistent pattern of activity over one hundred years. Part of this activity has been in cooperation with The Group, with its parallel and recorded objectives.

    Now if, for example, we found that the dominant interest of members was raising ducks, that they wrote articles about ducks, bred ducks, sold ducks, formed duck-studying councils, developed a philosophy of ducks,
then it would be reasonable to conclude that they had an objective concerning ducks, that this is not mere random activity.

    Historically, operations of The Order have concentrated on society, now to change society in a specific manner towards a specific goal: a New World Order. We know the elements in society that will have to be changed in order to bring about this New World order, we can then examine The Order's actions in this context.

• Education - how the population of the future will behave
• Money - the means of holding wealth and exchanging goods
• Law - the authority to enforce the will of the state,
                  a world law and a world court is needed for a world state
• Politics - the direction of the State
• Economy - the creation of wealth
• History - what people believe happened in the past
• Psychology - the means of controlling how people think
• Philanthropy - so that people think well of the controllers
• Medicine - the power over health, life and death
• Religion - people's spiritual beliefs, the spur to action for many
• Media - what people know and learn about current events
• Continuity - the power to appoint who follows in your footsteps

    Operations in each of these areas will be detailed in subsequent volumes. For example, in the next volume, The Order Controls Education, we will describe how Daniel Coit Gilman, President of Johns Hopkins University, imported Wundt psychological methods from Germany, then welded education and psychology in the U.S., established laboratories, brought these educational laboratories into major Universities and generated 100s of PhDs to teach the new educational conditioning system. One of the first of these Johns Hopkins doctorates was John Dewey. The result we well know. The educational morass of the '80s where most kids - not all - can't spell, read or write, yet can be programmed into mass behaviour channels.

    The Order's next move was to control the Foundations. They got all the big ones - Carnegie, Ford, Peabody, Slater, Russell Sage and so on. That's the topic of another volume. As in education, the modus operandi of The Order was to get in FIRST and set the stage for the future. The initial objective was to establish a direction in an organization. Selection of managers, intuitive or amoral enough to catch on to the direction, kept the momentum going. In the case of Foundations, The Order has usually maintained a continuing presence over decades.

• Andrew Carnegie profited from war through his vast steel holdings, but under the guidance of member Daniel Coit Gilman, Carnegie was also an enthusiastic president and financial backer of the American Peace Society. This is seemingly inconsistent. Could Carnegie be for war and peace at the same time?


• The League to Enforce the Peace, founded by members William H. Taft and Theodore Marburg, was promoting peace, yet active in urging U.S. participation in World War One. How could the League be for war and peace at the same time?



• In the 1920s, W. Averell Harriman was a prime supporter of the Soviets with finance and diplomatic assistance, at a time when such aid was against State Department regulations. Harriman participated in RUSKOMBANK, the first Soviet commercial bank. Vice-President Max May of Guaranty Trust, dominated by the Harriman-Morgan interests, became the FIRST Vice President of RUSKOMBANK in charge of its foreign operations.

      In brief, an American banker under guidance of a member of The Order had a key post in a Soviet bank! But we also find that Averell Harriman, his brother Roland Harriman, and members E.S. James and Knight Woolley, through the Union Bank (in which they held a major interest) were prime financial backers of Hitler.

      Now our textbooks tell us that Nazis and Soviets were bitter enemies and their systems are opposites. How could a rational man support Soviets and Nazis at the same time? Is Harriman irrational or is the inconsistency explainable?



• The Bundy family (we have a Memorandum on them later) gives us another example of seeming inconsistency. William Bundy was with the Central Intelligence Agency for a decade. McGeorge Bundy was National Security Assistant to Presidents Kennedy and Johnson. So the Bundys presumably support U.S.-European policy which is pro-NATO. Yet the Bundys have been linked to activities and organizations which are anti NATO and, indeed, pro-Marxist - for example, the Institute for Policy Studies. Are the Bundys inconsistent?


• Among individual members of The Order we find a wide variety of publicly proclaimed beliefs, ideologies and politics. William Buckely periodically chews out the Soviets. On the other hand, member John Burtt has been a member of a dozen communist front groups. Member William S. Coffin, Jr. spent three years with CIA and then became a leader of anti-Vietnam war activity through the National Conference for a New Politics and Clergy and Laymen Concerned about Vietnam. In fact, Coffin was one of the Boston Five charged and indicted for conspiracy to violate Federal laws. And, of course, W. Averell Harriman is elder statesman of the Democratic Party.

    Quite a mixture of beliefs and activities. Do they reflect inconsistent philosophies? How can The Order have a consistent objective with this potpourri of individual actions?

    The answer is, they are not at all inconsistent: because the objective of The Order is above and beyond these actions and in fact needs these seeming contradictions.

The State is Absolute

    How can there exist a common objective when members are apparently acting in opposition to one another?

    Probably the most difficult task in this work will be to get across to the reader what is really an elementary observation: that the objective of The Order is neither "left" nor "right." "Left" and "right" are artificial devices to bring about change, and the extremes of political left and political right are vital elements in a process of controlled change.

    The answer to this seeming political puzzle lies in Hegelian logic. Remember that both Marx and Hitler, the extremes of "left" and "right" presented as textbook enemies, evolved out of the same philosophical system: Hegelianism. That brings screams of intellectual anguish from Marxists and Nazis, but is well known to any student of political systems.

    The dialectical process did not originate with Marx as Marxists claim, but with Fichte and Hegel in late 18th and early 19th century Germany. In the dialectical process a clash of opposites brings about a synthesis. For example, a clash of political left and political right brings about another political system, a synthesis of the two, neither left nor right. This conflict of opposites is essential to bring about change. Today this process can be identified in the literature of the Trilateral Commission where "change" is promoted and "conflict management" is termed the means to bring about this change.

    In the Hegelian system conflict is essential. Furthermore, for Hegel and systems based on Hegel, the State is absolute. The State requires complete obedience from the individual citizen. An individual does not exist for himself in these so-called organic systems but only to perform a role in the operation of the State. He finds freedom only in obedience to the State. There was no freedom in Hitler's Germany, there is no freedom for the individual under Marxism, neither will there be in the New World Order. And if it sounds like George Orwell's 1984 - it is.

    In brief, the State is supreme and conflict is used to bring about the ideal society. Individuals find freedom in obedience to the rulers.

    So who or what is the State? Obviously it's a self-appointed elite. It is interesting that Fichte, who developed these ideas before Hegel, was a freemason, almost certainly Illuminati, and certainly was promoted by the Illuminati. For example, Johann Wolfgang Goethe (Abaris in the Illuminati code) pushed Fichte for an appointment at Jena University.

    Furthermore, the Illuminati principle that the end justifies the means. a principle that Quigley scores as immoral and used by both The Group and The Order, is rooted in Hegel. Even the anonymous Yale student who wrote the verse in Memorandum Three observed this principle at work on the Yale campus.

    This, then, is a vital part of our explanation of The Order. When its co-founder, William Russell, was in Germany in 1831-2, there was no way he could have avoided Hegelian theory and discussion. It was the talk of the campus. It swept intellectual Germany like a Pac Man craze. Most Americans haven't heard of it. And those who have don't want to hear any more about it. Why? Because its assumptions are completely at variance with our sense of individual freedom and Constitutional guarantees. Most of us believe the State exists to serve the individual, not vice versa.

    The Order believes the opposite to most of us. That is crucial to understanding what they are about. So any discussion between left and right, while essential to promote change, is never allowed to develop into a discussion along the lines of Jeffersonian democracy, i.e., the best government is least government. The discussion and the funding is always towards more state power, use of state power and away from individual rights. So it doesn't matter from the viewpoint of The Order whether it is termed left, right, Democratic, Republican, secular or religious - so long as the discussion is kept within the framework of the State and the power of the State.

    This is the common feature between the seemingly dissimilar positions taken by members - they have a higher common objective in which clash of ideas is essential. So long as rights of the individual are not introduced into the discussion the clash of ideas generates the conflict necessary for change. As the objective is also global control an emphasis is placed on global -_'-inking, i.e., internationalism. This is done through world organizations and world law. The great contribution of the Tafts to The Order w as on the world court system and world law - to the internationalist aspect of the New World Order.