Oh, not! Not the Coucil on Foreign Relations! Why they're a front for the Freemasons, and the CIA, and the Queen of England. /LaRouch paranoid mode.
Your point is?
Hey! You forgot the Bilderbergers.
You know, that kind of name calling was what they said when I read Gary Allen's "None Dare Call it Conspiracy" back around 1980. I thought the same thing myself at the time.
I went to live in France for a few years and found several Frenchmen who asserted the same things, about secret societies, a cabal of old-monied banking families, fremasons, etc. I thought those guys were crazy too.
Then, as part of my Air Force training, they taught us a class in world affairs that used Cleon Skousen's "The Naked Communist" and the companion volume, "The Naked Capitalist." I bought both books and read them. That led me to read (in a herculean effort) Carroll Quigley's "Tragedy and Hope."
After giving more than 20 years observation, to the assertions of these books, I'd have to say that I don't see anything in modern world affairs that was not predicted with a great deal of accuracy in their pages.
This kind of study and detached observation is not characteristic of your depiction of "conspiracy theorists." The only inaccurate description of world affairs is the term conspiracy, because it does not operate in covert manner in the least. Globalists are open about their plans to bring to pass world federalism. Name calling only serves the purposes of those who seek to subvert your freedom.
I would encourage you to read any of the works I referred to above, however I would advise not waiting 20 years to form an opinion. It may be too late by that time.
If you also would like more current reading on this topic, try reading Henry Kissinger's book "Diplomacy." Get it straight from the horse's mouth.