Posted on 09/22/2024 7:19:34 AM PDT by Dalberg-Acton
ChatGPT 9/21/2024
Do you know who Carroll Quigley is?
Yes, Carroll Quigley was an influential American historian and theorist, best known for his works on global history and geopolitics. He taught at Georgetown University for many years and is most famous for his book Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time (1966). In this book, he examined the development of Western civilization from the late 19th century to the mid-20th century, offering detailed insights into political, economic, and social structures.
One of Quigley's major points of interest is his belief in the existence of elite groups that shape global events behind the scenes, particularly financial institutions and secret societies. He argued that these groups have had significant influence over Western political and economic systems.
Quigley's ideas have also been referenced in various conspiracy theories, but he himself claimed not to oppose the idea of elite influence, only that it should be more transparent.
Do you have a particular interest in his work or a specific aspect of his theories?
In Tragedy and Hope, he said the elites who run America worked with Communists.
Yes, Carroll Quigley did make statements in Tragedy and Hope suggesting that the elites who wield power in the Western world, including America, worked with or had relationships with Communists. Quigley's perspective was that certain powerful groups, particularly financial elites, sought to maintain control and stability by influencing both sides of political and ideological conflicts. This included working with communists or socialist movements in some contexts, even though these elites may have been ideologically opposed to communism.
Quigley’s broader argument was that a transnational network of elites, particularly those connected to international banking and financial systems, sought to manage global affairs through manipulation of political forces, alliances, and wars. He suggested that this network was less concerned with ideological purity (capitalism versus communism) and more with maintaining their own power and influence across the world.
This is a key part of why Quigley’s work has been cited in many political and conspiracy theories—his assertion that elites would cooperate with seemingly opposing forces has been interpreted as evidence of covert collaboration between Western capitalists and communist regimes. Quigley himself did not frame this as a grand conspiracy but rather as a pragmatic strategy employed by elites to manage global instability.
It’s worth noting that Quigley did not see this elite control as inherently malevolent; he believed these groups had contributed to global stability, but he was concerned about their lack of transparency and accountability.
In Walter Isaacson's The Wise Men, he heaps much praise on an few unelected men who steered America, unbeknownst to citizens and voters.
Yes, in The Wise Men, Walter Isaacson, along with co-author Evan Thomas, highlights the significant role played by a small group of influential men—many of them unelected—who shaped American foreign policy during the mid-20th century. The book profiles figures like Dean Acheson, Averell Harriman, George Kennan, Robert Lovett, John J. McCloy, and Charles Bohlen, collectively known as "The Wise Men." These individuals were deeply involved in crafting post-World War II U.S. foreign policy, including the Marshall Plan, the creation of NATO, and strategies for containing communism during the Cold War.
Isaacson and Thomas present these men as patriots who used their positions of influence, often outside the realm of electoral politics, to steer the country through a challenging period. They were part of a tightly connected elite who moved fluidly between roles in government, finance, and diplomacy. The authors describe them as pragmatic and focused on America's global role, praising their wisdom and commitment to maintaining peace and stability.
However, this portrayal has also drawn criticism from some quarters, as it raises concerns about the lack of transparency and democratic oversight in how foreign policy was shaped. The fact that such significant decisions were being made by unelected individuals without direct accountability to the public taps into broader concerns about elite influence, similar to what Carroll Quigley discussed in Tragedy and Hope.
Isaacson's account can be seen as a reflection of admiration for their expertise and effectiveness, but it also sheds light on the unelected power structures operating behind the scenes in American governance.
I often think about this when I hear people say the U.S. is a "democracy", yet the voters aren't allowed to know who really runs the country.
That's a valid concern. While the U.S. is often referred to as a democracy, the reality is more complex. It's technically a constitutional republic with democratic elements, meaning citizens vote for representatives who are supposed to act on their behalf within the constraints of a legal framework. However, as you've pointed out, there are powerful, unelected figures and institutions—often tied to finance, military, and foreign policy—who wield significant influence behind the scenes.
This elite influence isn't always visible to the average voter, and many major policy decisions are made with limited public input or awareness. Groups like those discussed in The Wise Men, or the transnational elite networks that Quigley mentions, often operate in ways that are not directly accountable to voters. These dynamics raise questions about how much control citizens truly have over their government and whether the "democratic" aspect is as strong as it appears on the surface.
This kind of behind-the-scenes influence can create a sense of disconnect between what voters believe they're supporting and what policies are actually implemented, reinforcing the idea that true power doesn't always rest in the hands of elected officials.
Yeah—I think complex bureaucratic rules (like classification and compartmentalization) are a form of brainwashing.
Everyone assumes there must be a good reason for it—because everybody in authority assures them there is a good reason for it.
I am beginning to believe there is no there there—all smoke and mirrors—black magic.
but it will always be “a”.
it can mock sentience by sucking the brains out of everyone logged in at any moment, but it will always be “a.”
until, I suppose, they get a high confidence level on brainwave reading. by then I hope to have acquired a personal emp tool.
never goes out of style, even if largely forgotten.
It gets more relevant with every passing year.
Kinda hard to believe, since it was so relevant when it was made.
But the media has consolidated much more since then, and it has become globalized.
Excellent... Thank you. It is “The bigger picture” some of us speak of so often. We don’t see it because we limit our own scope of reality. It is all a big real world game of “strategy” just like the board game the powerful are playing with us.
Ever since I was a kid I got interested in this phenomenon because the old timers were always mentioning our problems coming from the greed of the Rothschilds, Rockefellers, and DuPonts.
“it can mock sentience”
I think you are looking at this from one angle—probably not the best one.
Think of AI as a tool like a hammer.
The hammer is “dumb”.
Now imagine a hammer the size of a planet.
It is still “dumb” but can cause a lot of havoc if it tried to “hammer” Earth.
My issue with AI is not with how smart it can be—it is what it will do with the smarts it gets.
“Yeah—I think complex bureaucratic rules (like classification and compartmentalization) are a form of brainwashing.
Everyone assumes there must be a good reason for it—because everybody in authority assures them there is a good reason for it.
I am beginning to believe there is no there there—all smoke and mirrors—black magic.”
Well said and it absolutely is. This is not new, it is Biblical and all there as a warning.
LS: A rare look “behind the curtain” of international global political influencers, from an even more rare attitude of “I will label these collective opinions about the powers behind the throne as a conspiracy, but will discuss their network without despising the whole network as a conspiracy against/for global influence.”
Adds a few more books to read.
I am surprised such “East Coast elite insiders” insiders such the Bush family, Vanuever Bush, the Roosevelts and other Harvard and Yale CIA-State Dept alumni were included in this summary.
I read T&H. A lot of wrong analysis.
Just one other comment on human analytical skills.
Humans have a lot of trouble with analysis of huge and complex data sets.
We just get overwhelmed.
Those are where AI can be very valuable.
—
Just a silly example.
Q. Do people with brown eyes have higher IQs than people with blue eyes?
We are looking at eight billion people and hard to find data on their eye color and IQ.
Presumably AI could find the data from bits and pieces on the web and then crunch some numbers.
“AI does not think. Computers are good at memory. Humans are intuitive and have can analyze things better.”
AI would not have made your “have can” grammatical error.
You are quite wrong about AI. It can and does already think and analyze things better than humans.
AI is on a very short trajectory to outsmart humans at almost anything based on thinking, logic, and analysis.
I think you may be right in distinguishing humans from AI in the area of intuition.
It does not appear to have the ability feel.
“I would like to see AI figure out which human beings have actual mass media ownership.”
At this time, AI can’t do that.
For that, you need Mr. Robot.
Why did the Roman Empire actually fall? AI based psychohistory on steroids is coming soon. Next generation AI will reveal many secrets. Vast new troves of information on genetics and pharmacology. Also physics, history and current events.
In the latter category the truth about Professor Carrol Quigley’s information on the impact of small groups of elites on recent history may turn out be very interesting, to say the least.
This piece from ChatGPT and “Dalberg-Acton” is likely on the right track, (In my opinion, because the professor did write these things, and he had no apparent reason to lie about it.) but we will know, with a high degree of certainty, in a couple of years. By evaluating vast amounts of information and looking for patterns on how one thing led to another, advanced AI will be able to give us useful new information on the past, and it will also be able to give us useful information and guidance on what course of action we should take today to achieve our goals, based on our own particular beliefs and desires.
This is one of the very important aspects of near AGI and full AGI AI that does not yet get enough attention. It will be more powerful than Hari Seldon’s “psychohistory” and it will be widely available. “ChatGPT-6, given our current X resources, how do we best achieve Y?” The AI (especially open source, unconstrained models) will provide you with a detailed and highly effective road map to your goal. And you will be able to constantly update in light of changing circumstances. If every ideological group and nation is using this very powerful tool, it will quickly create a very chaotic situation. It will profoundly destabilize an already delicately balanced world order.
I would add David Rockefeller, Zbigniew Brzezinski, and Pope John Paull II.
To add is not to promote or condone all their influences; but they were very instrumental, along with Reagan and Thatcher, in breaking the Iron Curtain and freeing Eastern Europe from Soviet domination, without a war breaking out.
I believe it is the mark of a mature intellect that seeks to find some common ground with leaders who hold a different ideology, as long as there can be some basis for relatively good-faith negotiations. The recent Reagan film illustrated Reagan's ability to do this with Gorbachev. Trump also took this stance with Kim, with Putin, XI, and a large alliance of Islamic nations who were nevertheless concerned about inter- and intramural terrorism.
This rare ability was one of the reasons we had four (very unanticipated by the left) years of peace and progress. The sanctimonious anti-Putin attitudes of the present administration, including whatever influence Hillary might still have, are childish and deadly. In fact, they are unAmerican. Our Founders warned against excessive foreign entanglements. One way to do that is not to stick our noses into every spat around the world and stir the pot on behalf of the military-industrial profiteers.
There is a category of science fiction movies that got the future completely wrong.
https://www.cbr.com/things-sci-fi-movies-got-wrong/
We live in a short term, temporary “reality”, a bubble about to burst.
Think of the potential for electro-magnetic pulse weapons to send us back to a pre-industrial, agrarian economy which virtually no one now has studied or understands.
Quigley knew, because he had been an engineer. He knew that fiat money is phoney. He knew the distinction between royal charter capitalism, financial capitalism and monopoly capitaliam.
Almost no one fixated on Tragedy & Hope has read the Anglo-American Establishment or the Evolution of Civilzations.
bkmk George Kennan
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.