Engineering consent: The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and the Mobilization of American public opinion, 1939-1945

Review of International Studies

Volumn 26, Issue 1, 2000, Pages 35-48

  Parmar, Inderjeet ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0034387753     PISSN: 02602105     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/s0260210500000358     Document Type: Article

References (80)

1. John B. Judis, 'Twilight of the Gods,' The Wilson Quarterly, Autumn (1991), pp. 43-4.
2. Robert Divine's study, Second Chance. The Triumph of Internationalism in America During World War II (New York: Atheneum, 1967) provides a valuable, though sketchy, outline of the organization's activities over a quarter of a century. According to Ricard Higgott and Diane Stone, the CEIP remains influential today. See their 'The Limits of Influence: Foreign Policy Think Tanks in Britain and the USA,' Review of International Studies, 20:1 (1994), pp. 15-34. Clearly, the 'interventionist/isolationist' dichotomy is an oversimplification; and while isolationism may have been a myth according to William Appleman Williams, it seemed real enough in the 1930s and 1940s. The political actors of the day certainly believed it to be a force in the country (which it was), and their political-economic strategies were constructed upon such an understanding.
3. Robert Divine's study, Second Chance. The Triumph of Internationalism in America During World War II (New York: Atheneum, 1967) provides a valuable, though sketchy, outline of the organization's activities over a quarter of a century. According to Ricard Higgott and Diane Stone, the CEIP remains influential today. See their 'The Limits of Influence: Foreign Policy Think Tanks in Britain and the USA,' Review of International Studies, 20:1 (1994), pp. 15-34. Clearly, the 'interventionist/isolationist' dichotomy is an oversimplification; and while isolationism may have been a myth according to William Appleman Williams, it seemed real enough in the 1930s and 1940s. The political actors of the day certainly believed it to be a force in the country (which it was), and their political-economic strategies were constructed upon such an understanding.
4. Joseph Kraft provides support for the view that the CEIP embodied many of the key elements of 'the Establishment' - defined as a group of men with an 'Eastern classical, liberal education, moderate-liberal political views . . . rich enough not to worry about money . . . and strongly imbued with the notion that "public office is a public trust"'. Kraft claimed that the US foreign policy Establishment's historic role was to win World War II and to 'drive isolationism from the field, to make internationalism not only respectable but beyond serious question . . . to make foreign policy . . . bipartisan'. See his Profiles in Power (New York: New American Library, 1966) pp. 187-8. It must be borne in mind that 'internationalism' was not a monolithic movement. The CEIP was on the . movement's 'conservative' wing.
5. Gramsci, Selections From the Prison Notebooks of Antonio Gramsci (London: Lawrence and Wishart, 1971; translated and edited by Quintin Hoare and Geoffrey Nowell-Smith); Robert Cox, 'Gramsci, Hegemony and International Relations', in Stephen Gill (ed.), Gramsci, Historical Materialism and International Relations (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993). Corporatism, as a concept used by American diplomatic historians, is not as comprehensive as that found in European political science. Corporatism in the former case refers to a far more informal set of arrangements and understandings than those commonly associated with, say, postwar tripartism in Britain.
6. Gramsci, Selections From the Prison Notebooks of Antonio Gramsci (London: Lawrence and Wishart, 1971; translated and edited by Quintin Hoare and Geoffrey Nowell-Smith); Robert Cox, 'Gramsci, Hegemony and International Relations', in Stephen Gill (ed.), Gramsci, Historical Materialism and International Relations (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993). Corporatism, as a concept used by American diplomatic historians, is not as comprehensive as that found in European political science. Corporatism in the former case refers to a far more informal set of arrangements and understandings than those commonly associated with, say, postwar tripartism in Britain.
7. Brian Balogh, 'Reorganizing the Organizational Synthesis,' Studies in American Political Development, 5:1, (1991), p.121.
8. Eldon J. Eisenach, The Lost Promise of Progressivism (Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas, 1994) is an excellent source for further documentation of such tendencies. See also, Ellen Condliffe Lagemann, The Politics of Knowledge (Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press, 1989), p. 4.
9. Eldon J. Eisenach, The Lost Promise of Progressivism (Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas, 1994) is an excellent source for further documentation of such tendencies. See also, Ellen Condliffe Lagemann, The Politics of Knowledge (Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press, 1989), p. 4.
10. Balogh, p. 123.
11. David Walter Eakins, The Development of Corporate Liberal Policy Research in the United States, 1885-1965 (unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin, 1966), pp. 520, 146.
12. Hogan, The Marshall Plan (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987), pp. 97, 139. See also, Hogan, 'Corporatism', Diplomatic History, 10, Autumn (1986).
13. Hogan, The Marshall Plan (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987), pp. 97, 139. See also, Hogan, 'Corporatism', Diplomatic History, 10, Autumn (1986).
14. Larry L Fabian, Andrew Carnegie's Peace Endowment (Washington, DC: CEIP, 1985).
15. Alger Hiss Oral History Memoir, p. 50; Carnegie Corporation Project, Oral History Research Office, Columbia University.
16. Lawrence Shoup and William Minter, Imperial Brain Trust (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1977).
17. Shoup and Minter, p.87; p.92.
18. Dye Who's Running America? (New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1979), pp. 166-7.
19. Samuel P. Huntington, The Soldier and the State (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1957), pp. 271-3.
20. In an address to the Pilgrims of New York entitled, 'There Can be No Isolation,' Butler consigned to the dustbin the 'superstition . . . of isolation from world affairs'. The notion of isolationism, he claimed, had been 'invented by those who have no conception of the facts of our history'. Speech to the Pilgrims, 28 January 1942, in GB I 57 - Bound Addresses 1887-1946, Butler Papers.
21. Trustees annual meeting, 16 April 1915, pp. 6-7.
22. Divine, p. 22.
23. Trustees annual meeting, 16 April 1915, box 19, file 1231.
24. Walter Lippmann, Public Opinion (New York: Macmillan, 1941), p. 248; originally published in 1922.
25. Nicholas Murray Butler, Across the Busy Years (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1939), p. 90.
26. In the year ending June 1939, for example, CEIP expenditure exceeded $500,000 which, at today's prices, exceeds $5 m.
27. Divine, p. 21.
28. Butler, pp. 93-94, Across the Busy Years, vol. II; Trustees meeting, 9 December 1940; Trustees meeting, 13 December 1943, p. 40.
29. Butler, pp. 93-94, Across the Busy Years, vol. II; Trustees meeting, 9 December 1940; Trustees meeting, 13 December 1943, p. 40.
30. Butler, pp. 93-94, Across the Busy Years, vol. II; Trustees meeting, 9 December 1940; Trustees meeting, 13 December 1943, p. 40.
31. Butler, p. 94, vol. II; Trustees meeting, 9 December 1940; Executive Committee (EC) meeting, 8 December 1941.
32. Butler, p. 94, vol. II; Trustees meeting, 9 December 1940; Executive Committee (EC) meeting, 8 December 1941.
33. Butler, p. 90, vol. II.
34. Divine, p. 21.
35. Conferences for University Men in CEIP Papers, IV: Organizations, CFR, boxes, pp. 354-6.
36. Letter, Eugene E. Pfaff to Malcolm W. Davis, 2 February 1945, in CEIP Papers, box 359, IV: Organizations, file 65395.
37. Op. cit., John Greco, A Foundation for Internationalism: The CEIP, 1931-1941 (unpublished doctoral dissertation, Syracuse University, 1971), pp. 26-7.
38. Trustees meeting, 11 December 1939, pp. 33-5. The transcripts of the broadcasts were sent to listener study groups along with other discussion material, according to Divine, p. 32.
39. Trustees meeting, 6 May 1943; Divine, p. 102; Trustees meeting, 13 December 1943.
40. Trustees meeting, 6 May 1943; Divine, p. 102; Trustees meeting, 13 December 1943.
41. Dalgliesh, Community Education in Foreign Affairs (New York: CFR, 1946) pp. 8-9.
42. Trustees meeting, 11 December 1944.
43. EC meeting, 30 March 1938; expenses statement, 30 June 1939.
44. Trustees meeting, 11 June 1945, pp. 23-8; Greco, p. 25.
45. Letter, Duc de Richelieu to Mrs. N. M. Butler, 11 July 1944.
46. Letter, Hull to Butler, 30 November 1939.
47. Letter, Malcolm W. Davis to Butler, 21 June 1943.
48. Divine, pp. 127-9; Trustees meeting, 13 December 1943; Dalgliesh, p. 3.
49. EC meeting, 13 December 1937.
50. Memorandum, Shotwell to Haskell, 4 March 1942.
51. Memorandum by Waymack, 11 March 1943, in CEIP Papers, IV: Organizations, box 354, file 63759, pp. 1-2.
52. Trustees meeting, 6 May 1943, p. 42; Judis, p. 47.
53. Trustees meeting, 9 December 1940.
54. Divine, pp. 50-5.
55. Divine, p. 292; New York Times, 9 July 1965.
56. Acheson, Present at the Creation (New York: WW Norton, 1969), pp. 240-1.
57. Butler, vol. I, p. 397; p. 13; p. 69.
58. Butler, vol. I, p. 397. This attitude was further demonstrated in his widely-rumoured role as Harding' 'unofficial' ambassador in Europe in the early 1920s.
59. Mark V. Nadel and Francis E. Rourke, 'Bureaucracies,' in Fred I. Greenstein and Nelson W. Polsby (eds.), Handbook of Political Science, vol. 5 (London: Addison-Wesley, 1975) p. 395.
60. Memorandum, JM Jones to Leo Pasvolsky, 'Further Memorandum on Public Relations', 20 November 1942, Records of Pasvolsky (Special Assistant to the Secretary of State, 1938-1945), in RG 59 General Records of the Department of State, box 3 (1942) file 12. In addition, see memorandum by Raymond Rich (Chief, Division of Organized Groups) and Peter Cusick, 12 February 1942, in which they refer to the plan they worked out for pro-interventionist groups in New York in 1941-42, in Records of the Office of Facts and Figures, Decimal File of the Director, 1941-42, pp. 330-40, box 15, in RG 208 - Records of the Office of War Information, National Archives, Washington, DC. Further references provided in Inderjeet Parmar, 'The Issue of State Power: A Case Study of the Council on Foreign Relations', Journal of American Studies, 29:1 (1995). See also, Benjamin Ginsberg, The Captive Public. How Mass Opinion Promotes State Power (New York: Basic Books, 1986) pp. 225-6.
61. Memorandum, JM Jones to Leo Pasvolsky, 'Further Memorandum on Public Relations', 20 November 1942, Records of Pasvolsky (Special Assistant to the Secretary of State, 1938-1945), in RG 59 General Records of the Department of State, box 3 (1942) file 12. In addition, see memorandum by Raymond Rich (Chief, Division of Organized Groups) and Peter Cusick, 12 February 1942, in which they refer to the plan they worked out for pro-interventionist groups in New York in 1941-42, in Records of the Office of Facts and Figures, Decimal File of the Director, 1941-42, pp. 330-40, box 15, in RG 208 - Records of the Office of War Information, National Archives, Washington, DC. Further references provided in Inderjeet Parmar, 'The Issue of State Power: A Case Study of the Council on Foreign Relations', Journal of American Studies, 29:1 (1995). See also, Benjamin Ginsberg, The Captive Public. How Mass Opinion Promotes State Power (New York: Basic Books, 1986) pp. 225-6.
62. Memorandum, JM Jones to Leo Pasvolsky, 'Further Memorandum on Public Relations', 20 November 1942, Records of Pasvolsky (Special Assistant to the Secretary of State, 1938-1945), in RG 59 General Records of the Department of State, box 3 (1942) file 12. In addition, see memorandum by Raymond Rich (Chief, Division of Organized Groups) and Peter Cusick, 12 February 1942, in which they refer to the plan they worked out for pro-interventionist groups in New York in 1941-42, in Records of the Office of Facts and Figures, Decimal File of the Director, 1941-42, pp. 330-40, box 15, in RG 208 - Records of the Office of War Information, National Archives, Washington, DC. Further references provided in Inderjeet Parmar, 'The Issue of State Power: A Case Study of the Council on Foreign Relations', Journal of American Studies, 29:1 (1995). See also, Benjamin Ginsberg, The Captive Public. How Mass Opinion Promotes State Power (New York: Basic Books, 1986) pp. 225-6.
63. Trustees meeting, 13 December 1943, pp. 50-51.
64. Letter, Sweetser to Pasvolsky, 22 August 1942, in Pasvolsky Papers, box 3, file 10.
65. Letter, Hull to Butler, 26 November 1937; Butler to Hull, 27 November 1937, in Catalogued Correspondence. In November 1937, Hull wrote to Butler of opposition groups in America ignorant of the facts while the Department had a surfeit of information to make 'available to the public to offset and straighten out these oppositions'. That the CEIP contributed to the State Department's public opinion offensive is demonstrated by Butler's Annual Report for 1937, outlining his Division's efforts in rural areas to promote the Reciprocal Trade Agreements Program among farmers.
66. Memorandum, 'The Program of Studies of the Committee on International Economic Reconstruction;' Letter, Condliffe to Watson, 24 November 1943, pp. 1-2, in James T. Shotwell Papers, box 241 - Committee for Economic Reconstruction 1940-44, Columbia University.
67. Letter, Condliffe to Pasvolsky, 5 June 1943, in Pasvolsky Papers, box 4, file 7, 1943, RG 59.
68. Nadel and Rourke, p. 394.
69. Divine, p. 22; p. 252.
70. Masland, 'Attitudes and Activities of the Organized "Peace" Pressure Groups, 1920-41', 29 March 1943, in Cordell Hull Papers, 'Subject File: Foreign Policy, Public Opinion in 1931-43', Microfilm Reel 35, Library of Congress, Washington, DC.
71. Divine, p. 21.
72. Letter, W.W. Waymack (Editor and Vice-President, Des Moines Register and Tribune) to Butler, 16 March 1942, in Norman H. Davis Papers, 'CEIP', box 8, Library of Congress.
73. Lazarsfeld, The People Look at Radio (Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press, 1946), pp. 11-12; p. 82; p. 95. In an earlier study, Lazarsfeld argued that 'listening groups should be more successful where they tie in with ideological movements;' in Radio and the Printed Page. An Introduction to the Study of Radio and Its Role in the Communication of Ideas (New York: Duell, Sloan and Pearce, 1971), p. 127. (Originally published in 1940).
74. Lazarsfeld, The People Look at Radio (Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press, 1946), pp. 11-12; p. 82; p. 95. In an earlier study, Lazarsfeld argued that 'listening groups should be more successful where they tie in with ideological movements;' in Radio and the Printed Page. An Introduction to the Study of Radio and Its Role in the Communication of Ideas (New York: Duell, Sloan and Pearce, 1971), p. 127. (Originally published in 1940).
75. Key cited by J. N. Rosenau, Citizenship Between Elections. An Inquiry into the Mobilizable American (New York: The Free Press, 1974), p. xxxiii.
76. Ellis W. Hawley, The Great War and the Search for a Modern Order 1917-1933 (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1992, Second Edition), pp. v-vi.
77. Hawley, 'The Discovery and Study of a "Corporate Liberalism",' Business History Review, 12:3 (1978), pp. 309-20.
78. Hogan, 'Corporatism,' p. 363.
79. Thomas J. McCormick, 'Drift or Mastery?' Reviews in American History, December (1982); Thomas Ferguson, 'From Normalcy to New Deal', International Organization, 38:1 (1984).
80. Thomas J. McCormick, 'Drift or Mastery?' Reviews in American History, December (1982); Thomas Ferguson, 'From Normalcy to New Deal', International Organization, 38:1 (1984).