American academic, Joan Roelofs, in Foundations and Public Policy: The Mask of Pluralism (State University of New York Press, 2003) argues that Ford and similar foundations play a key role in co-opting opposition movements:
While dissent from ruling class ideas is labeled ‘extremism’ and is isolated, individual dissenters may be welcomed and transformed. Indeed, ruling class hegemony is more durable if it is not rigid and narrow, but is able dynamically to incorporate emergent trends. Roelofs reports that John J. McCloy, while chairman of the Foundation’s board of trustees, ‘…thought of the Foundation as a quasi-extension of the U.S. government. It was his habit, for instance, to drop by the National Security Council (NSC) in Washington every couple of months and casually ask whether there were any overseas projects the NSC would like to see funded.’ Roelofs also charges that the Ford Foundation financed counter-insurgency programs in Indonesia and other countries.
Bob Feldman’s long article, Alternative Media Censorship: Sponsored by CIA’s Ford Foundation? offers more spine-chilling details of how these two “philanthropic institutions” work together to advance the gringo agenda in the alternative news media. Feldman’s article explains in part why haven’t we read about this FF-CIA collusion before, even in the freak press. He writes on the Questions Questions website:
The multi-billion dollar Ford Foundation’s historic relationship to the Central Intelligence Agency is rarely mentioned on Pacifica’s Democracy Now / Deep Dish TV show, on Fair’s Counterspin show, on the Working Assets radio show, on The Nation Institute’s Radio Nation show, on David Barsamian’s Alternative Radio show or in the pages of Progressive, Mother Jones and Z Magazine. One reason may be because the Ford Foundation and other establishment philanthropic organizations subsidize the Establishment Left’s alternative media gatekeepers/censors.
See a fascinating diagram of this insidious “gatekeepers” phenomenon at the bottom of this page.
Back to OF and SAG: Is it even remotely possible that SAG, an ongoing recipient of Ford Foundation funds for his human- rights work around the world, is unaware of the half-century-long carnal relationship between FF and CIA? If he is aware of it, why does he deny it so emphatically? If he isn’t, what’s wrong with him? Is he one of the individual dissenters who were welcomed and transformed, in Roelofs’ words, by the Ford Foundation and the CIA?
In any case, it has been a privilege to observe even marginally the machinations of the formidable Ford Foundation-CIA two-headed Orthrus, the philanthropic dog, and to confirm my suspicions regarding OF’s true colors.
Filed under: US media, gringos | Tagged: CIA, CIA front organizations, Ford Foundation, two-headed dog
Dear Mike,
This is an astonishing series (from I to III) that revealed me some bibliography regarding this issue. Actually, here in my South American country this presence is felt daily, as well as the total absence of any comment and/or knowledge about it. Considering this USA’s government (military) operation called “Law and Development”, which brought these “unitedstatasian human rights” along with economic, cultural, public and legal programs to be implanted during the 60s and 70s, some SAG have totally adopted them, made some private “Palaces” with the funds (for Palaces I mean institutions, books, academic positions and other social frames in which they can reign and promote this foreign military program in Latin America, as USAID participates along with the World Bank, the IMF and FF, giving them money and any kind of support – and I may name David Trubek as a main agent for this), although not a single one of them mentions these names. Here we have dozens of law schools, law firms, researches, funds for research, as well as an “aura” of moral and values which goes along with this. The Law and Development, which is the official label for what you have subjected in this three posts of yours, grows stronger and with no opposition at all. I am a lawyer that studied with these professors, that work for one of these law firms, but I have a personal somewhat libertarian, anarchist and marxist foreground – thus my daily activities, studies and work only stand for economical reasons, as I am a low midle class person living in the suburbs. We are in a total submission position, and no opposition, no mention of all these international agents. I have found a much more wide foreing bibliography and issues about Law and Development. Human rights “take us by the balls” (if you excuse me the usage of this word, not less offensive than everyday american movies and songs), as we have severe poverty and social catastrophies in Latin America. These persons act freely in this territory, as Law, economics and these deformed “human rights” (that, as you said, only does not apply to the US itself…) are too powerful for us to fight. Actually, during our last dictatorship (1964-1985), most of our courage and human personel were neutralized, maybe gone forever, or until new ones arise. Anyways, I don’t have any connection to this (“how could I know you don’t”, I asked myself before writing this reply in your blog, although my loneliness about this issue pushed me towards writing it anyway), and found very amusing the bibliography you left, as well as the report of this happening – and I somewhat appreciated your choice of not naming the sinners, but only the sin. Thank you for sharing, and I wish best hopes for us in Latin America, altough I am as skeptcial as Melville’s Bartleby when it comes to this subject anyways… Good day and best regards from a South American country victim of Law and Development.