Domination and Control

My Recent Posts

I’ve been reading Titan, the biography of John D. Rockefeller, Sr, authored by Ron Chernow.  Rockefeller was the creator of Standard Oil and built an empire of oil magnates using cut-throat tactics on his competition.  Chernow claims that one of Rockefeller’s earliest ambitions was to be rich.  Standard Oil quickly grew so large that it became the target for the Sherman Anti-Trust Act in 1890, but the wily Standard Oil “combine” was merely inconvenienced by this and other legislation designed to contain it.

 

But this post is not about Rockefeller or Standard Oil.  It is about the pervasive drive for domination and control by nations, institutions, and individuals.  It is about “cripple-to-control,” intimidation, and other tactics used to subvert and subdue another person or group to someone’s will.

 

Certainly war is one example of the impetus to dominate and control, but there are others, more subtle, but just as psychologically destructive.  Before war can ever begin, a group of people must delegate power to others to make decisions for the group.  Delegated authority defines many institutions, like religious, governmental, educational, and corporate.  The individual or group gives up freedoms in order to participate in or accommodate the requirements of the larger group.

 

In the modern United States, we claim we are free, and perhaps we are freer, in some ways, than others.  However, our presumed independence has come at a huge cost, primarily submission to a host of laws and regulations that affect every area of our lives.  The willingness to delegate authority to others on such a grand scale has the effect of keeping the populace in a child-like state of dependency, without the initiative to question or challenge the status quo.

 

The current “opioid crisis” provides an example of how this subtle mind control works.  Governments and religions have been attempting to control what people ingest throughout time, but opium and its derivatives have been around—and used for pain relief, among other things—for thousands of years.  It has been used as a medium of exchange in places like China, historically, and in places like Afghanistan today.  It functions as “commodity money” on the black market, especially in poverty-ridden areas where honest cash is hard to obtain.  It circumvents taxation.

 

The political importance of opiates spans the centuries.  In 1729, the Chinese government outlawed opium, but the British used slave labor in India to grow the opium poppy and to smuggle the drug into China.  Because gold was leaving the country, the Chinese government confiscated illegal shipments of British opium, leading to the “Opium Wars,” in 1839-1842.  When the British won, they forced China to open its ports to more vigorous European trade.

 

After the Spanish-American War, in which the United States acquired the Philippines, among other territories, a missionary there became concerned about narcotics addiction.  He urged US President Theodore Roosevelt to form an international committee to collaborate in the control of the narcotics trade.  This led to the Harrison Narcotics Act of 1914 (under Woodrow Wilson’s term), which put the federal government in control of every aspect of the cultivation, processing, distribution and consumption of opiates and cocaine.  This followed the Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906, which required labeling of patented medicines which contained any mind-altering substances, including cocaine, opiates, cannabis, and alcohol.

 

The early 20th century was characterized by a distinct moralizing tone.  Leaders like John D. Rockefeller, who was a strict Baptist teetotaler and contributor to the Temperance movement, and President Woodrow Wilson, son of a fire-and-brimstone preacher, both believed they were doing God’s will and therefore justified in their business and political actions.  This was the era leading up to Prohibition, beginning January 16, 1920, at the end of Wilson’s second term.

 

Although Franklin D. Roosevelt ended Prohibition (and thus re-instituted the whiskey tax that had provided a strong revenue source for the federal government) efforts to control and tax drugs didn’t end there.  The Marijuana Tax Act of 1937 banned its use and sales. (Cannabis, or marijuana, has been used across cultures as a medicinal agent for 5000 years.)  While the act was ruled unconstitutional years later, the prohibitions were replaced by the Controlled Substances Act of 1970. 

 

The Controlled Substances Act created the drug schedule classification system used today.  Under this formula, marijuana and heroin, among others, fall under Schedule I, which makes them absolutely illegal, with no recognized medical benefit.  Prescription opioids, like Oxycontin and Fentanyl—two major narcotics implicated in the “opioid crisis”—fall under Schedule II, or those with recognized medical benefit but high abuse potential.

 

In 1971, US President Richard Nixon declared the “War on Drugs” and claimed drugs were “public enemy number one.”  Despite costing over a trillion dollars to date, the “War on Drugs” continues, with no measureable benefits.  Nixon claimed this federal action would curtail the high level of heroin addiction in returning Vietnam veterans.

 

While the “opioid crisis” has attracted the attention of government, professional organizations, media, and the public, I believe it is symptomatic of a much larger problem having to do with dominance and control on a grand scale.  A good working definition of “addiction” is that it is a means of acting out power struggles with internal or external authority.  That the US is an addictive nation may be disputed by some, but no one can deny the enormous growth of the pharmaceutical industry and the accompanying belief that pills or other drugs can alleviate human suffering on all levels.

 

That the approach to the “opioid crisis” is so skewed by selective information, misinformation, and politics makes me wonder if the “crisis” is among the authorities who feel themselves losing their grip.  We are told that heroin overdoses are on the rise, especially in poverty-stricken communities, and that the addition of fentanyl to the mix increases the likelihood of overdose.

 

But we are not told that there is a difference between heroin (absolutely illegal) and prescription opioids, or that many drug users combine a multitude of drugs that also depress the respiratory system.  We are advised that we need more funding for treatment, but we are not told that the most effective treatments to date have come from free, peer-supported groups like Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) or Narcotics Anonymous (NA).  We are told that medication-assisted treatment (MAT) has been approved by the FDA and supported by professional organizations, but we are not told that two of the four approved drugs for MAT are also opioids, thereby, according to some, only perpetuating the problem of addiction.

 

Anyone who wants to address the “opioid crisis” in a realistic way should consider the power struggles generated by the laws themselves, which set up a dominance-and-control scenario that invites abuse of power as well as of drugs. 

Comments

George N Romey Added Jan 12, 2018 - 8:32pm
Katherine great article. There’s big money in addiction. Notice decades back you had people that boozed it up daily but lead fully functional lives. Some lived to be very old.
 
Today they are forced into rehab.
Autumn Cote Added Jan 12, 2018 - 10:10pm
Please note, the second best way to draw more attention to your work is to comment on the work of others. I know this to be true because if you do, I'll do everything in my power to draw more attention to your articles (there is a lot I can do and would like to do on your behalf). 
Charles Burris Added Jan 13, 2018 - 12:23am
Excellent article Katherine. Here are some more intellectual resources or ammunition which bolster your case and further reader discussion of this vital topic:
 
First two Amazon book lists relating to the topic:
 
The Rockefeller World Empire
 
How the U.S. Government Created America's Drug Problem
 
 
And two authoritative video documentaries related to the topic:
 
 
How Big Oil Conquered the World
From farm to pharmaceutical, diesel truck to dinner plate, pipeline to plastic product, it is impossible to think of an area of our modern-day lives that is not effected by the oil industry. The story of oil is the story of the modern world. And this is the story of those who helped shape that world, and how the oil-igarchy they created is on the verge of monopolizing life itself.
 
 
Why Big Oil Conquered The World
The 20th century was the century of oil. From farm to fork, factory to freeway, there is no aspect of our modern life that has not been shaped by the oil industry. But as the "post-carbon" era of the 21st century comes into view, there are those who see this as the end of the oiligarchy. They couldn't be more wrong. This is the remarkable true story of the world that Big Oil is creating, and how they plan to bring it about.
 
 
And finally my recent article here at Writer Beat:
 
Who Rules America: Power Elite Analysis, the Deep State, and American History
 
 
Charles Burris Added Jan 13, 2018 - 1:00am
Katherine, here is one additional item which you and your Writer Beat readers may find of interest which pertains to this vital topic: 
rel="bookmark">Rockefeller Medical Empire of Death
 
 
Charles Burris Added Jan 13, 2018 - 1:44am
Since the death of their paragon Walter Cronkite, the true collective face of the Establishment regime media has been exposed once and for all.  It is not the noble visage of an intrepid crusader for truth, but a sagging countenance, oily and obsequent by decades of lying and servility to their masters.  But of course this is not how the press perceive themselves.  They are not like you or me.  They are a special class of beings.  They are the Fourth Estate, an imaginary extension of the rigid class structure of pre-Revolutionary France from the Estates General. In the Ancien Regime there was the clergy, the nobility, and lastly, the bourgeoisie and commoners.  The Fourth Estate see themselves on an equal par with the first two elevated classes, and above the third.  It is the aristocratic notion that gentlemen and ladies of the press serve a vaunted “public interest,” and do not soil themselves with activities of a rank and sordid commercialism.  Such endeavors would be a violation of their hoary journalistic ethics.  They have a public trust to enlighten the masses in their duties to their betters, those who compose the state and their adjunct servitors in the kept press
 
 
Charles Burris Added Jan 13, 2018 - 1:46am
CBS chairman William Paley, Fred Friendly, and Edward R. Murrow were part of the Central Intelligence Agency’s target="_blank">Operation Mockingbird to provide deflection and cover for the CIA’s ‘family jewels’ of the day. CBS News president Sig Mickelson (1954-61) was liaison to the CIA. Because of his frequent communications, Mickelson even had a direct private phone line installed to the Agency. target="_blank">CBS anchorman Walter Cronkite was a former military intelligence officer also connected within this elite nexus.
 
CIA director Allen Dulles (fired by JFK after the Bay of Pigs disaster and later the key member of the Warren Commission cover-up), CBS chairman William Paley, and CBS board director Senator Prescott Bush were intimate associates in various sociopolitical networks of the northeastern seaboard establishment found in Washington and New York during the days of the early Cold War. Whether they would meet in their elite private clubs, at the Harold Pratt House of the Council on Foreign Relations, or in Wall Street corporate and bank board rooms, these old birds of a feather flocked, connived, schemed, and conspired together.
 
 
Charles Burris Added Jan 13, 2018 - 1:48am
In the past I have written about the covert war in the 1950s between the Central Intelligence Agency and Wisconsin Senator Joseph McCarthy, particularly how the CIA mobilized its Operation Mockingbird media assets such as Murrow to engage in a counter-attack upon old “Tail Gunner Joe” when he was building up momentum in going after the Agency’s “family jewels” of the time after his highly-publicized campaigns against communist spies in the state department and the army.  Two interesting books of Establishment Studies (or power elite analysis) have outlined how CIA director Allen Dulles directed his counterintelligence chief James Jesus Angleton to find a means of destroying McCarthy. Angleton chose a veteran of the OSS, James McCargar, target="_blank">to undertake this covert espionage/disinformation action against McCarthy. These facts are discussed in Tim Weiner, Legacy of Ashes: The History of the CIA; and Gregg Herken, The Georgetown Set: Friends and Rivals in Cold War Washington.
 
In the fascinating and absolutely compelling book by David Talbot, target="_blank">The Devil’s Chessboard: Allen Dulles, the CIA, and the Rise of America’s Secret Government, we find the following:

target="_blank">In March 1954, McCarthy’s subcommittee convened a hearing on “alleged threats against the chairman.” One witness — a military intelligence officer named target="_blank">William Morgan who had worked for target="_blank">C. D. Jackson in the White House — stunned the subcommittee by recounting a conversation that he had the previous year with a CIA employ named target="_blank">Horace Craig. As the two men were discussing how to solve the McCarthy problem, Craig flatly stated, “It may be necessary to liquidate Senator McCarthy as was [assassinated Louisiana senator] Huey Long. There is always some madman who will do it for a price.” (pages 223-224).
Charles Burris Added Jan 13, 2018 - 1:57am
So for generations our arrogant political, financial, and media elites have disdained and disparaged the views of the average American citizen. Here is an authoritative, clarifying example of their conduct:
A New Poll Shows the Public Is Overwhelmingly Opposed to Endless US Military Interventions
 
"The researchers at J. Wallin note that, even in spite of what they call a 'climate of distinct political polarization,' the results show these sentiments vary “only in degrees of intensity across political party, ideology, age groups, gender, and geographic regions.”

"The survey found that 78 percent of Democrats, 64.5 percent of Republicans, and 68.8 percent of independents supported restraining military action overseas. 'Rarely,” noted the report, 'does opinion research reveal issues that enjoy shared sentiments on a bi-partisan level.'

"The poll brings home just how divorced the Beltway—and its think tanks, media outlets, and political class—is from the expressed desire of a large majority of Americans for a responsible and reasonable foreign policy, a policy that, arguably, has been absent since the end of the Cold War.

"Candidates from both parties running in this year’s midterm election ignore the results of the new survey at their peril."
 
Charles Burris Added Jan 13, 2018 - 2:03am
Princeton Professors Martin Gilens and Benjamin I. Page concluded a recent study of 1,779 government policies over several decades entitled Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens. They concluded that “Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence. The results provide substantial support for theories of Economic-Elite Domination…” In other words, we no longer live in a democratic republic. We are no longer governed by Congress or the President or the Courts, but by a Corporate, Financial, and Military Elite that write the laws to suit themselves. Welcome to Oligarchy.
Doug Plumb Added Jan 13, 2018 - 4:09am
Rockefeller is Rothstein.
George N Romey Added Jan 13, 2018 - 9:38am
As long as enough Americans fall for the fear factor , “we fight them over there so we don’t have to fight them here” and in general flag waving bullshit we will have the military state. Let a politician run on a platform of removing us from military and counter surveillance  interference and they’d get trounced. There’s big money in killing overseas.
 
If we left other nations alone for the most part they’d ignore us. The way it should be.
Charles Burris Added Jan 13, 2018 - 11:17am
George N. Romney, you stated the problem very precisely.
 
The outstanding example within our lifetimes of this phenomenon was the 2008 and 2012 presidential candidacies of twelve term Congressman Ron Paul.
 
Establishment elites, both within the bipartisan political class and their regime media presstitutes, sought his destruction and marginalization despite his widespread popular demonstration of fervent support which cut across all ethnocultural groups or sectarian barriers.
 
Paul was the sterling champion of peace, diplomacy, and non-intervention. He courageously spoke out against invading the world in preemptive, unconstitutional, illegal no-win wars of aggression and destroying the remains of the republic at home.
 
Ron Paul cautioned that we must actively dismantle the imperial welfare-warfare state and engage in in a prudential policy of strategic disengagement of the American empire from over 900 bases in 130 countries, and bring the troops home to protect the political and territorial integrity of the US.
 
Crony corporatism and the military-industrial/surveillance state go hand in hand. Paul warned that, at the epicenter of this leviathan, is the extra-constitutional deep state, unelected and covertly pulling the strings without safeguards of checks and balances or separation of powers.
 
Perhaps most cogently, he pointed out that the Fed is the enabler of this disastrous situation, both foreign and domestic, and needs to be abolished.
Katharine Otto Added Jan 13, 2018 - 12:11pm
Charles,
Although I didn't mention it specifically, I believe the CIA profits mightily from drug laws and drug dealing around the world, most recently in Afghanistan.  
 
As far as Rockefeller and the oil empire are concerned, I surmise that he was eager to support any endeavor that would sell oil  When you think about that and wonder what sells oil, you have to consider that war, international shipping (imports and exports), private automobiles, and plastics are at the top of the list.  
 
I'm a minimalist by nature, and wonder at the wastefulness of all the above.  I'm a fan of peace, the domestic economy (preferring regional over international markets), public transportation with a strong revival of passenger rail, and a sharp reduction in the use of plastics, especially single-use packaging.  
 
I've been a big fan of Ron Paul, too, but have not been so impressed by his son, Rand.  Maybe he will grow into being a leader.  I agree that none of these monoliths would have grown so large without the debt-backed currency (the bottomless barrel) created by the Federal Reserve Act.  You probably know that John D. Rockefeller, Sr. was a prime mover in creation of the Fed, and the Rockefeller family descendants may still have a significant financial stake in it.
 
That the federal government is owned by the oil companies, and not the other way around, shows in Trump's recent approval of off-shore oil drilling along virtually all US coastlines.  That the people oppose that and our interminable wars makes no difference to the thugs in control of our collective future.
 
By the way, thanks for your comments.
 
 
 
John Minehan Added Jan 13, 2018 - 12:13pm
"Opium is the religion of the people." Aldous Huxley, Brave New World Revisited.
Katharine Otto Added Jan 13, 2018 - 12:17pm
George,
Thanks, as always, for your supportive response.  The scapegoating principle has been used throughout history to avoid facing internal problems.  If you can find an external enemy to blame, it generates at least temporary cohesiveness at home.  However, it doesn't seem to be working for the US lately.  There is so much infighting at all levels that the country as a whole seems to be running on automatic pilot status quo.  Like you, I keep waiting for the bubble to burst.
 
Even though Trump is a firebrand, he seems to be fulfilling the role of latest scapegoat.  Maybe the focus on him will deflect attention from more dangerous situations.  
Katharine Otto Added Jan 13, 2018 - 12:20pm
Autumn,
I know that and have been reading more than commenting, simply because I often don't know what to say.  It also seems some of my favorite contributors have not been contributing lately.  I'll try to do better.
mark henry smith Added Jan 13, 2018 - 12:27pm
Wonderful piece, Katherine, per always.
 
The opioid crisis is a red herring to a far greater problem, healthcare. No one appears to talk about the fortunes drug companies made selling "less addictive" opioids, OxyContin and Oxycodone, which turned out to be more addictive than old treatments. It would be maddening if you didn't know the history of American businesses determination to use the monopoly power of government to give them access to poison peddling and take the blame in the form of signing off, as the FDA did with these drugs.
 
The increase in fentanyl use is not an accident, in my assessment of the problem. It is a way to do two things, one kill people at the bottom of the ladder, in a way just like the Philippines, eliminating addicts, and it is a way to create a crisis to divert attention away from real societal concerns that will have far-reaching consequences. Which our government has always done to control an unruly and mistreated underclass.
 
Not that opioid addiction is not tragic for the families of addicts, but it is not something that won't play out over time. Rules will change. Treatment will improve. The real problem with addicts isn't addiction, but something at the psychic core. If these drugs were the devil they're made out to be, all people who used them would become addicted, but only a small percentage do. I have a theory and it is the basis of a treatment system I would like to institute when I have tested it. Thanks again.
 
And oil, the rise of the automobile, the government involvement in road building, the incestuous relationship between, oil, auto, petro-chemicals, government is still at the heart of all political decisions in the US. And the military, prison, drug, sports, education cartel is too. And Disney. Walt was an agent for the FBI reporting on "communists".      
George N Romey Added Jan 13, 2018 - 12:29pm
Katharine Trump is being used for fodder. Just look at the entire Russian situation. Again they are being framed as the 1950s boogeyman. And too many Americans are buying it.
 
All of this is made possible by endless printing of fiat currency. Until the day the debt induced global economy collapses the endless wars, conflicts and meddling will continue all wrapped up in “Yankee Doodle Dandy.”
 
Katharine people like yourself, myself and many others have figured out this game. We know it’s not sustainable. So do many people that have become fabulously wealthy off it. They are buying hard assets, stashing cash and buying land. They see the day that they or their children will see a crash to a hocus pocus finance.
Dino Manalis Added Jan 13, 2018 - 12:38pm
Drugs are useful to treat patients. but addictive and easily abused.  Doctors and pharmacists have to be very careful about prescribing and giving patients such medicines and replace them with other products, if possible, after a period of time.
Katharine Otto Added Jan 13, 2018 - 1:05pm
Mark Henry,
I could write several articles based on your response. Health care, for instance, is such a large and comprehensive issue that nobody seems to have a handle on it.  Why are Americans so sickly?  Could it be related to our sicko society, with its misplaced values and rampant hypocrisy?  
 
Drug overdoses are on the rise, but so are suicides, murders, and medical error.  Physician-assisted suicide.  Our interminable wars.  All have the effect of reducing population numbers.  Is this conscious?  I doubt it, but it may be the natural result of the debilitating competition that believes it profits by suppressing others.
 
What galls me about the medical profession is that it is so obsessed with funding and legislation, yet the simplest measures, like NA and AA, have proven most effective over time.  Also, the professionals and FDA have fallen under the spell of the pharmaceutical companies, so that they presume to treat the opioid problem with more opioids.  Meanwhile, they make no effort to educate the public about addition, the dangers of over- and inappropriate medication, or alternatives for such problems as pain relief.  
 
You're right that monopolists abound, with the federal government the biggest monopoly of all.  What to do about it?  I wish I knew.
 
 
John Minehan Added Jan 13, 2018 - 1:14pm
Funny, we as a society, have seen major problems coming from the over-prescription of powerful pain killers, but people in end-of-life situations often die in agony from insufficient analgesia.  
Katharine Otto Added Jan 13, 2018 - 1:15pm
George,
I have to wonder who is really pulling the strings.  It can't be a single individual, or even a group, as these people can't get along with each other.  I believe it is larger than that, in that it's a belief system attracting like minds who believe they are born to control.  John D. Rockefeller certainly believed that his wealth was a combination of hard work and God's will, and his Baptist faith reinforced it.  
 
As far as hoarding cash goes, when the currency collapses, the cash will be no good.  Buying land may work as long as the creek don't rise (my property was flooded by storm surge from Hurricane Irma), and the government doesn't eminent domain your assets or seize because of some "trumped" up claim.  I contend there are really no safe havens for hoarded wealth, so it's safer to be poor.  Less to lose.
Charles Burris Added Jan 13, 2018 - 1:36pm
If I could strongly recommend one book to Writer Beat readers that touches upon all the important topics discussed in this thread, it would be Murray N. Rothbard’s newly published posthumous volume The Progressive Era  (.pdf) edited by Patrick Newman.
 
This path-breaking research of that exemplary scholar Murray N. Rothbard has shattered forever the court history consensus on that seminal period in American history.

Contents
Foreword by Judge Andrew P. Napolitano . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Introduction by Patrick Newman. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Preface. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Chapter 1: Railroads: The First Big Business and the Failure of the Cartels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

Subsidizing the Railroads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Th e Rationale of Railroad Pricing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
Th e Attempts to Form Cartels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56

Chapter 2: Regulating the Railroads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67

Th e Drive for Regulation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
Strengthening the Interstate Commerce Commission . . . . . . . 80 Chapter

3: Attempts at Monopoly in American Industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91

America’s Industrial Revolution. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
Th e Petroleum Industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
Iron and Steel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
Agricultural Machinery. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
Th e Sugar Trust . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
Overall Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
Charles Burris Added Jan 13, 2018 - 1:37pm
Chapter 4: The Third Party System: Pietists vs. Liturgicals. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109

The Third Party System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
Pietists vs. Liturgicals: The Political Party Constituencies . . . 115
Pietists vs. Liturgicals in the Midwest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
Reform and the Drive for Prohibition. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131 5 Chapter

5: The Democratic Triumph of 1892 . . . . . . . 135

The Road to Democratic Triumph. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135
The Republicans Regroup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149
The Retreat from Prohibition. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149
Restricting Immigration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151
Pietism and Women’s Suffrage. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156

Chapter 6: 1896: The Collapse of the Third Party System and of Laissez-faire Politics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163 1. Th e First Collapse: 1894 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163

Th e Final Collapse: 1896 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168
The Transformation of the Parties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178

Chapter 7: Theodore Roosevelt: The First Progressive, Part I. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199 1. Financial Influence on Political Parties. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199

T.R.: Th e Making of a Progressive . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203
T.R. as President: Th e “Good” Trusts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213
T.R. as President: Th e “Bad” Trusts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224
The International Oil War. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230
Charles Burris Added Jan 13, 2018 - 1:38pm
Chapter 8: Theodore Roosevelt: The First Progressive, Part II. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235 1. The Meat Packing Myth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235

Harvey W. Wiley and the Pure Food and Drug Act . . . . . . . . 241
Theodore Roosevelt and the Conservation Crusade. . . . . . . . 252

Chapter 9: The National Civic Federation: Big Business Organized for Progressivism . . . . . . . 273

The Origins: The Chicago Civic Federation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 274
Organizing the NCF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 276
The Clash over Unions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 277
The Drive for Workmen’s Compensation Laws . . . . . . . . . . . . 279
Monopolizing Public Utilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 284
Regulating Industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 288

6 The Progressive Era
7. Allied Group: The American Association for Labor Legislation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 291
Chapter 10: The Progressive Era and the Family . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 295

Ethnoreligious Conflict and the Public Schools . . . . . . . . . . . 295
Progressives, Public Education, and the Family: The Case of San Francisco . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 302
Ethnoreligious Conflict and the Rise of Feminism . . . . . . . . . 309
Women’s Suff rage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 309
Eugenics and Birth Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 314
Gathered Together: Progressivism as a Political Party . . . . . . 316
Significance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 318
Charles Burris Added Jan 13, 2018 - 1:39pm
Chapter 11: Origins of the Welfare State in America . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 321
1. Why the Welfare State? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 322

Yankee Postmillennial Pietism. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 327
Yankee Women: The Driving Force. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 332
Progressives and the Gradual Secularization of Postmillennial Pietism: Ely, Dewey, and Commons . . . . . . . . 333
Yankee Women Progressives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 340
The New Deal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 350
The Rockefellers and Social Security. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 356

Chapter 12: War Collectivism in World War I . . . . . 361

Big Business and War Collectivism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 363
Intellectuals and the Legacy of War Collectivism . . . . . . . . . . 383
The Drive to Prolong War Collectivism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 389
Charles Burris Added Jan 13, 2018 - 1:41pm
Chapter 13: World War I as Fulfillment: Power and the Intellectuals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 397
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 397

Pietism and Prohibition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 400
Women at War and at the Polls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 408
Saving Our Boys from Alcohol and Vice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 414
The New Republic Collectivists . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 420
Economics in Service of the State: Th e Empiricism of Richard T. Ely . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 428
Economics in Service of the State: Government and Statistics. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 436

Appendix: Toward the Centralization of Science: The National Research Council . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 453
Charles Burris Added Jan 13, 2018 - 1:42pm
Chapter 14: The Federal Reserve as a Cartelization Device: The Early Years, 1913–1930 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 463

The Origins of the Federal Reserve: The Dissatisfaction of New York Bankers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 465
The Road to the Federal Reserve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 469
The Structure of the Federal Reserve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 478
The Personnel of the Federal Reserve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 481
The Federal Reserve and World War I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 485
Internationalizing the Cartel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 487
Britain and the Gold Exchange Standard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 491
Open-Market Purchases in the 1920s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 494
Creating the Acceptance Market . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 500
From Boom to Depression . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 505
Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 511

Chapter 15: Herbert Hoover and the Myth of Laissez-faire. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 513

Herbert Hoover as Secretary of Commerce . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 513
Herbert Hoover Fights the Great Depression . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525

Bibliography. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 541
Index of Names . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 571
Index of Subjects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 583
Katharine Otto Added Jan 14, 2018 - 8:54pm
Charles,
Sounds like a meaty book.  I will look into it.
Katharine Otto Added Jan 14, 2018 - 9:00pm
John,
There's a lot of ambivalence over pain killers.  Patient-controlled analgesia, especially for cancer patients, is pretty common.  And, of course, no pain reliever is 100% effective.  There's also the fear of overdosing critically ill patients and causing respiratory depression or aspiration.  
 
The politics surrounding opioids make it hard for anyone involved to think objectively.
Bill Kamps Added Jan 15, 2018 - 6:28am
KO, the opiod crisis is a merge of many  factors, and yes big ones are the profit to be made.  Another big part of it was our desire for a "quick solution".  Doctors want to see their patient for as little time as possible, so they can see more patients, patients dont question what the doctor says because taking a pill to feel better fits nicely into what they want from a doctor. 
 
While the politics and money played a great role, a lot of people suspended common sense as well.  Patients think that because the doctor prescribed the pills they are safe.  They may be necessary in some circumstances, but they are not safe.  People are literally playing with fire, and dont want to think too much about it, because the pills make them feel good.
 
In some situations it is easier to take a pill to cure a painful bad back, than to lose weight and exercise.
 
There is a lot of pain out there, both real and emotional, and the pills make people feel better. 
 
What to do about it?  Well, like many situations, we have to take control of our own lives.  This isnt necessarily easy.  Companies and governments literally hand us the means to ruin our lives.  Doctors use the same techniques as drug pushers, "the first one is free", handing out samples.   We need to remember that we are responsible for our health, not the doctor, we need to find out about any drug before we start taking it, and if possible we need to change our lives so taking drugs every day is not our way of life. 
 
We learned during Prohibition that we cant pass laws to regulate what is harmful to people.  Same is true with opiods.  If they were free, and available like M&M's does that mean we should be taking them routinely?  No of course not. 
 
Whether it is meth, alcohol, opiods, or some other drug, there are many people who want to escape the problems in their lives through drugs of some kind.  There will always be a drug that people can take to escape.  Impossible to address this at the supply level, only at the demand level.
Stone-Eater Friedli Added Jan 15, 2018 - 11:15am
Katharine
 
Fantastic one, agree fully ! And that applies to a lot of European countries as well, especially the German-speaking part of Austria, Switzerland and Germany:
 
The willingness to delegate authority to others on such a grand scale has the effect of keeping the populace in a child-like state of dependency, without the initiative to question or challenge the status quo.
 
 
Dave Volek Added Jan 15, 2018 - 7:29pm
New laws often have nefarious motivations behind them.
 
If anything, we need a new system of governance to create laws that benefit society as a whole, rather than having some vested interest or ideology be the main beneficiary.
xanadu Added Jan 16, 2018 - 12:40am
Big Oil is a dinosaur industry that is going to become increasingly irrelevant as we move forward into the 21st century.
Mircea Negres Added Jan 16, 2018 - 3:42am
Great article, Katharine. I would suggest a small correction though. The Opium Wars had at their origin the high European demand for Chinese tea and that empire's monopoly on it. The Chinese demanded silver in payment for tea and over time this led to a dangerous trade imbalance. To counteract it, the British and Americans figured to sell Indian and Afghan opium to the Chinese for silver, and they could do it cheaper because of modern mass manufacturing techniques. Until then opium was really the preserve of the wealthy, but the lower prices offered by the British and American traders made it more accessible for ordinary people. In short order there were around 150.000.000 addicts in China, a figure which stayed there until the communists came to power and the government began to crack down on the opium business and criminalized addiction.
 
The oldest fight that I know of in human society is the struggle for power between the masses and ruling elites. In order to gain, hold and even increase their power, ruling elites have used a variety of means. It began with the corruption of religion (a social construct which gave hope and set up social norms of behavior) and over the millennia moved on to other sophisticated measures, the latest of which is brainwashing of the masses via propaganda in schools and media, which is aided by the introduction of substances which lower mental resistance like opiates and hallucinogens. When it comes to fighting that, the only way is to do what Nancy Reagan once advised- JUST SAY NO- because drugs are enormously addictive and the best cure is prevention. Again, a very good article. Thumbs up big time!  
mark henry smith Added Jan 16, 2018 - 1:10pm
The entire basis of addiction and the nanny state is to alleviate suffering, so industries develop when suffering arises to alleviate suffering that create more suffering in a never-ending cycle. Look at opioids. We had addicts, in my youth it was heroin, and it was decided to help them not by legalizing the drugs and making sure they got their fix in a clean and healthy way, because you can have healthy heroin addicts, as Burroughs, the writer was, but to criminalize addiction and create all alternative addictive substance, methadone, run as a monopoly by the state for the benefit of who? So all of your addicts can now become state addicts.
 
And the drug used to treat ODs is another state sponsored way of rewarding an industry that has no incentive to fight addiction, but to promote it. Wouldn't fentanyl be a perfect way to increase the need for your product? I'm not accusing, just saying. There all kinds of perverse incentives out there. The prison industry needs criminals. The methadone industry needs addicts. The healthcare industry needs patients. The insurance industry needs people who make bad decisions. And all of these industries need a government that does not stand in the way, but is willing to be complicit.
 
I believe in the power of government to do great things, but in the US we have the government that Eisenhower warned about. An institutionalized military that needs wars to justify its existence, so wars are created. Vietnam didn't start because we wanted to create a democratic Vietnam, but for exactly the opposite reason. And isn't it odd that the Gulf of Tonkin, a fabrication, we now know, came on the heals of country wide race riots? Nothing limits dissent like a good war. And a good draft of young black men into an organization that will channel their aggression away from political activism.
 
Thank you Bill Kamps and Mircea and all. I am an example of a person coming to the conclusion that just say no is the best approach and to accept the suffering of going cold turkey. Our inability to watch people suffer the consequences of their behavior is one of the great tragedies of our age. Our inability to put institutions and programs in place that offer alternatives to degenerate behavior and poor health is another.          
Katharine Otto Added Jan 16, 2018 - 4:33pm
Bill,
I agree that patients trust doctors too much, but the system is set up that way.  The best way to create demand for anything is to put controls on it--the forbidden apple in the Garden of Eden is an example. 
Prescriptions and illegality are ways of putting controls and increasing perceived value of the substance.  That's why I question drug laws, including prescription laws. 
Removing prescription requirements would force people to educate themselves about what they are taking and why, a method of making people more responsible for their own lives, as you suggest.
 
Katharine Otto Added Jan 16, 2018 - 4:38pm
Bill,
The desire to pop a pill goes farther than just escaping problems in life.  There's also the use of pharmaceutical agents, such as antihypertensives and statins, to compensate for stress and worry, lack of exercise, and poor diet.  In fact, medications are used instead of common sense and patience to alleviate a whole variety of uncomfortable physical and mental feelings.  
 
When we talk about drugs, we need to think beyond the addictive ones to see how addicted we are to pharmaceuticals across the board.
Katharine Otto Added Jan 16, 2018 - 4:43pm
Stone-Eater,
Thank you for the support.  I've been hearing people wishing for a "leader," as though any "leader" will solve the world's current problems.  But it seems so-called "leaders" only provide someone to blame when things go wrong.  You would have to be a masochist to want to be a leader.
Katharine Otto Added Jan 16, 2018 - 4:49pm
Dave,
Laws that "benefit society as a whole" depend on the perspective of those making the laws.  I confess to not having read your book, but I'm suspicious of anyone who presumes to make laws that coerce other people.  I prefer the concept of "guidelines."  For instance, do we need laws against murder, when everyone knows it's wrong?   
Katharine Otto Added Jan 16, 2018 - 4:55pm
xanadu,
What sells oil?  War, international shipping, the private automobile, airline travel, plastics.  Electric cars are not the answer, because they will depend on the power grid for a long time, which will increase energy demands.  
 
Alternatives like solar and wind may alleviate the demand for oil, but as long as we pursue oil-intensive practices like war and shipping, the oil industry will prosper.
Katharine Otto Added Jan 16, 2018 - 5:04pm
Mircea,
I stand corrected, since you seem to know more about Chinese/European trading history than I do.  My main point is that drug laws are a control tactic by the "ruling classes."  Who gave the "ruling classes" the right to rule?  They just had the biggest guns and probably the best propaganda machines, such as the church.
 
Many drugs that are abused now have been around for centuries.  Why is it only now a problem?  Doesn't that say something about society as a whole?
 
I would like to know why there were so many addicts in China and why the government cared enough to outlaw it, or why any government feels the need to control the use of mind-altering drugs.
 
I remember a professor in college saying every culture known to man has used some kind of mind-altering drug, except the Eskimos, who quickly adopted alcohol.
 
Also, why does the brain have receptors for drugs like the opiates and cannabis.  The drugs would have no effect if the brain wasn't receptive to them.  
 
Katharine Otto Added Jan 16, 2018 - 5:16pm
Mark Henry,
I don't know about the power of government to do great things.  We don't know of alternatives, since we've never been without government.  
 
Be that as it may, the US government is a great enabler, and it supports the industries that foster dependencies.  Thus my theory that addiction is indicative of power struggles with authority.  We are moving toward more controls, but I believe the solution lies in having fewer controls.  Certainly the scare tactics being used now about the "opioid crisis" confuse the picture, because they are so distorted.  The conflation of heroin and prescription opioids is only one example.
 
I can't help but wonder if the increase in heroin use is related to the war in Afghanistan.   Morphine use went down after the Civil War, when fewer people were getting maimed.  Heroin use went down after returning Vietnam vets quit smuggling it in.  I'm also told that drugs are used as a medium of exchange for the CIA and terrorists.
B.E. Ladin Added Jan 17, 2018 - 12:28am
This is an interesting, and informative article.
B.E. Ladin Added Jan 17, 2018 - 12:31am
See American Made with Tom Cruise.
mark henry smith Added Jan 17, 2018 - 4:00pm
Very interesting points, Katherine. The government is in the drug business on both ends, I do believe, as Iran-Contra showed. The government is in the criminalization business, as drug policy shows. The government is in the war business, as all of our recent debacles show. Our government is in the entertainment business, as Trump shows. Our government is in the debt business, as the deficit shows. Our government is in every business except the one it was set up to be in. That's the democracy business.
 
Let's get government back to doing what it was created to do, be a facilitator for freedom and democracy amongst all citizens.   
Katharine Otto Added Jan 18, 2018 - 10:43am
Mark Henry,
That's two of us.  Now, we merely need to convince all those people who profit from being in the government business.
 
In broad strokes, I believe the best function of government is to make it as easy as possible for people to do the right thing.  That would include encouraging individual participation without coercion.  Why do people contribute time and money voluntarily to their churches or charities?  Well, they believe in the missions and the good intent.  How many Americans can say they believe in the federal government's good intent?
mark henry smith Added Jan 18, 2018 - 1:08pm
Katherine, they can't.
 
We've had slavery. We've had broken treaties with the indigenous people. We've had the Trail of Tears. We've had refugees from the Holocaust turned away. We've had an entrenched elite run this country from day one. A new elite has evolved, a moneyed elite that doesn't have America's best interest in mind. We have politicians who play to the basest interests to get elected, use emotional blackmail, use money as an eliminator of candidates who think too much.
 
But there are good people who want to change this. There are good women and men running. They have been energized by the horrible behavior that has been the boy's club of politics. Trump is the epitome of a system in crisis. I hate to say it, but we needed him to pull us down to the bottom. Isn't that what they say in addiction circles, that you have to hit bottom before you can come up? How much lower can we get?   
Dave Volek Added Jan 18, 2018 - 1:52pm
Katherine
 
Laws that "benefit society as a whole" depend on the perspective of those making the laws. 
 
I'm not sure we will ever get full unity on any laws. But we need a process to vet out the various positions and come to some kind of resolution, and let these laws guide our society.
 
For example, we could create a law that says "All murderers get put in jail for 20 years". But we have all sorts of shades of murder, from self defence to serial killers. We have decided not to treat all murderers the same--and that requires a lot of laws to define those various shades of grey.
 
As much as I believe western democracy has outlived its usefulness, it does a much better job of finding laws that work well--when compared to various oligarchies. For example, someone who overly criticizes Mr. Trump can write a best seller book. Someone who overly criticizes Mr. Putin will find himself in jail on trumped up charges.
 
The various facets of western democracy--free press, free speech, free association, elections, legislative procedures, peaceful protests, etc.--are quite remarkable in how they all work together. Very little is done by a western government is based on arbitrary whims of some powerful people. Any law requires some degree of popular support and some due process.
 
It is true that many people feel a lot more disconnected from the law-making process than they did a few decades ago. As this credibility erodes, we risk going back to some kind of oligarchy when a populist leader just says: "I'm suspending the constitution and taking full control." If this does happen, average citizens are going to have less input than they did before. I would hope that they read my book and start building the TDG before we get to this state.
 
 
 
 
Katharine Otto Added Jan 18, 2018 - 8:03pm
Mark Henry,
The system itself needs a drastic overhaul.  While there may be good people running, they are eventually swallowed up by the system itself, used, compromised, bought, outnumbered or otherwise disempowered.
 
You may be right that Trump has brought the system's inadequacies front and center, for all the world to see.  But we could go lower if we got into a nuclear war or let the off-shore drilling go much farther.  I just hope all our enemies don't decide to gang up on us.  We seem to be provoking them in a big way.
Katharine Otto Added Jan 18, 2018 - 8:13pm
Dave,
You believe in government more than I do.  Lots of laws are pushed through by committed proponents, and the people are swept along by propaganda or misrepresentation of the truth.  Every law restricts freedoms and sets one person or group of people in judgement over others.  
 
While you compare the US with other governments, I compare it with what was promised and how those promises have been turned upside down.  Government "by the people" has become "government over the people," yet the people are forced to pay for it.  Rather, in the US, future people are expected to pay for it.  
George N Romey Added Jan 19, 2018 - 10:20am
Katharine big causes big everything.  We've thrown out the 1890 Sherman Anti Trust Act and now we have a litany of too big too fail corporations with too much influence over Americans.  So we turn to big government to police the big corporations but big corporations have enough financial resources to control big government.  Its all one big party we are paying for with those at the top getting benefits and protection.
mark henry smith Added Jan 19, 2018 - 11:58am
Well said George. If the game is money, period, money in politics, money in healthcare, money in environment, no one can compete with the corporations. The amount of money they've accumulated is mind-boggling. And they claim to be citizens like everyone else, that's how the law presents them, so why don't they have to go to war? Why don't they have to go to jail? Why don't they have the same obligations as ordinary citizens? They get the benefit of citizen status, protecting the individuals to a large degree from being responsible for bad decisions, but they get none of the duties, none of the social responsibilities beyond providing jobs and creating profits. So much of the debt is a direct result of taxes being reduced on corporations and that money being placed in private hands. It's classic economics 101. Private interests accepting the profits and pushing the burdens onto the public. It's classic distraction theory, kicking the can down the road by appealing to immediate, emotional issues that do little or nothing to improve the lives of ordinary citizens. 
Katharine Otto Added Jan 19, 2018 - 11:59am
George,
Agreed.  Not only that, but they have bought the opposition via the stock market.  How many people are dependent on their dividends or their stock investments to provide financial security now or later?  No one who has investments wants to rock the boat, and the worst offenders, like Exxon Mobil, pay the highest dividends.  I've decided virtual monopolies, like AT&T or Southern Company, which owns Georgia Power, should not be allowed to trade on Wall Street.  In the case of Southern Company, rate payers are forced to subsidize dividends for people who live all over the world.